Skip to main content

Full text of "The Periodical Cicada"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 





*" •«8j|!§Si>£'H:;i}t'|^-'iJ|(cuLTURE, 


i|: ■ ... * idi 

. "a* "a* -aK» *xt? '"?' 



L. O. Howard, Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. 
0. L. Marlatt, Entomologist and Acting Chief iit absence of Chief. 

R. S. Clifton, Chief Clerk. 

F. H. Chittenden, in charge of breeding experiments. 

A. D. Hopkins, in charge of forest insect investigaticms. 

W. D. Hunter, in charge of cotton boll weevil investigations. 

P. M. Webster, in charge of cereal and forage-plant insect investigaticms. 

A. L. QuAiNTANCE, in charge of dedduov^-fruit insect investigations. 

E. F. Phillips, in charge of apiculture. 

D. M. Rogers, in charge of gipsy and brawn-taU m^th work. 
A. W. Morrill, engaged in white fly investigaticms. 

E. S. G. Trrus, m charge of gipsy moth laboratory. 
C. J. GiLLiSs, engaged in silk investigations. 

R. P. CuRRiE, assistant in charge of editorial work, 
Mabel Colcord, librarian. 


The present year will witness the recurrence in the Southern States 

of the largest of the 13-year broods of this insect, and the prompt 

publication of this Bulletin is therefore advised to meet inquiries 

for information and to assist in the collection of accurate records of 

this and subsequent broods. 


L. O. Howard, 

Entomologist and Chief of Bureau. 
Hon. James Wilson, 

Secretary of Agriculture. 



Summary of the habits and characteristics of the Cicada 11 

The races, broods, and varieties of the Cicada 14 

A 17-year race and a 13-year race 14 

Relation of climate to the races 18 

The dwarf periodical Cicada 20 

The broods of the periodical Cicada 22 

The origin of the broods 22 

The classification of the broods 25 

The relationship of the different broods 28 

The relationship of the 17-year broods 29 

The relationship of the 13-year broods 30 

Sources of error in the old records 30 

Broods of 14, 15, or 16 year periods 33 

Future appearances 34 

The distribution of the periodical Cicada 34 

Sources of information 34 

The general range of the species and of the two races 35 

The range of the well-established broods, taken in numerical order 38 

Broods of the 17-year race 38 

Brood 1—Septendecim^l910 38 

Brood II— Septmdedm— 1911 39 

Brood lll—Septendedm—1912 41 

Brood lY— Septendecim— 1913 42 

Brood YSeptmdedvi—1914 43 

Brood VI — Septendedm — 1915 44 

Brood \U— Septendedm— 1916 46 

Brood \lll—Septmdedm—1917 47 

Brood IX— Septendedm— 191S 49 

Brood X— Septendedm— 1919 50 

Brood XI— Septendedm— 1920 54 

Brood XII — Septendedm — 1921 55 

Brood Xlll— Septendedm— 1922 57 

Brood XIV— Septendedm— 1923 58 

Brood XV— Septendedm— 1907 60 

Brood XVI— Septendedm— 190S 62 

Brood XVII— Septendedm— 1909 63 

Broods of the 13-year race 65 

Brood XVIII— !ZV«fecim— 1919 65 

Brood XIX— 2V6<feeim— 1907 66 

Brood XX— !ZV6<fecim— 1908 68 

Brood XXI— Trededm— 1909 68 

Brood XXII— IVedeam— 1910 69 



The distribution of the periodical Cicada — Continued. Page 
The range of the well-established broods, taken in numerical order — Cont'd. 
Broods of the 13-year race — ^Continued. 

Brood XXIII— !ZVe(feam--1911 71 

Brood XXlY^Tredeci'mr-'19l2 73 

Brood XXV— !ZVedecim— 1913 ^ 74 

Brood XXVI— !ZVedecim— 1914 74 

Brood XXVII— 7Ve£fecimr-1915 75 

Brood XXVIII— Tredecim^ldie 75 

Brood XXIX— 2Vedea7nr-1917 75 

Brood XXX— TVedcctm- 1918 76 

Systematic position and structural details 77 

The mouth parts, or beak 79 

The ovipositor. 81 

The musical apparatus 82 

The song notes of the periodical Cicada 84 

The so-called sting of the Cicada 86 

Transformation to the adult stage 88 

Period of emergence 88 

Duration of the adult stage 90 

Method of emergence 91 

Cicada huts, or cones 91 

The act of transformation ^ 98 

The adult insect and its habits 99 

Numbers and local distribution 99 

The food habits of the adult insect 101 

The Cicada as an article of food 102 

Oviposition and its effect on the plant 104 

Plants selected 105 

Result to the plant of oviposition 106 

Method of inserting the eggs 109 

The growth and hatching of the eggs 110 

• The underground life of the Cicada 112 

Experimental proofs of the long underground life . .* 112 

A successful 17-year breeding record 114 

History of the larval and pupal stages 116 

Technical description of the different stages 118 

First larval stage 118 

Second larval stage " 119 

Third larval stage 119 

Fourth larval stage 120 

First pupal stage 121 

Second pupal stage 121 

The habits of the larva and pupa 122 

The food of the larva and pupa 122 

The location in the soil 124 

The method of burrowing 125 

Damage occasioned by larva? and pupae 126 

The natural enemies of the Cicada 127 

Insect parasites 129 

Dipterous enemies 129 

Hemipterous enemies 130 


The natural enemies of the Cicada — Continued. Page. 
Insect parasites — Continued. 

Hymenopterous enemies 130 

The parasites of the eggs 130 

The larger digger wasp 132 

Mite parasites of the eggs 135 

The oribatid mites •. 136 

Miscellaneous predaceous mites 136 

The vertebrate enemies 138 

The fungous disease of the adults 139 

Remedies and preventives. .'. 140 

The general character of the problem 140 

Means of destroying the emerged pupae and adults 141 

Collection of adults 141 

Destruction with insecticides 142 

Applications to prevent oviposition 143 

Precautionary measures 144 

Means against the Cicada in its underground life 145 

The periodical Cicada in literature 146 

Bibliography of the periodical Cicada 154 

Appendix. Dr. Gideon B. Smith's chronology of the periodical Cicada 170 

Index 175 




The transformation of the periodical Cicada ( Tibicen septendedm) Frontispiece. 

Plate I. Work of the periodical Cicada 12 

II. Photograph of chambers of the periodical Cicada, general view, 

taken at New Baltimore, N. Y., May, 1894 92 

III. Photograph of chambers of the periodical Cicada in woodshed, 

Washington, D. C, 1902 '. 94 

IV. Chambers of the periodical Cicada, natural size, in woodshed, 

Washington, D. C, 1902 96 

V. Empty pupal shells of the periodical Cicada clinging to leaves. 

Brood X, 1902, Washington, D. C 98 

VI. The transformation of the emerged periodical Cicada 100 


The periodical Cicada, representing the typical form and dwarf form. . 

Fig. 1.- 

2. Map showing distribution o: 

3. Map showing distribution o 

4. Map showing distribution o 

5. Map showing distribution o: 

6. Map showing distribution o 

7. Map showing distribution o: 

8. Map showing distribution o 

9. Map showing distribution o 

10. Map showing distribution o 

11. Map showing distribution o 

12. Map showing distribution o 

13. Map showing distribution o 

14. Map showing distribution o 

15. Map showing distribution o 

16. Map showing distribution o 

17. Map showing distribution o 

18. Map showing distribution o 

19. Map showing distribution o 

20. Map showing distribution o 

21. Map showing distribution o 

22. Map showing distribution o 

23. Map showing distribution o 

24. Map showing distribution o 

25. Map showing distribution o 

26. Map showing distribution o 

the broods of the 13-year race, 
the broods of the 17-year race 

Brood I, 1910 

Brood II, 1911 

Brood III, 1912 

Brood IV, 1913 

Brood V, 1914 

Brood VI, 1915 

Brood VII, 191G 

Brood VIII, 1917 

Brood IX, 1918 

Brood X, 1919 

Brood XI, 1920 

Brood XII, 1921 

Brood XIII, 1922 

Brood XIV, 1923 

Brood XV, 1907 

Brood XVI, 1908 

Brood XVII, 1909 

Brood XVIII, 1919 

Brood XIX, 1907 

Brood XX, 1908 

Brood XXI, 1909 

Brood XXII, 1910 

Brood XXIII, 1911 




Fig. 27. Map showing distribution of Brood XXIV, 1912 73 

28. Map showing distribution of Brood XXVI, 1914 75 

29. Map showing distribution of Brood XXIX, 1917 76 

30. Map showing distribution of Brood XXX, 1918. 77 

31. Head and prothorax of Cicada, lateral view 78 

32. Head of Cicada, front view, right mandible and maxilla drawn out.. 79 

33. Head and prothorax of Cicada, lateral view, with parts separated to 

show structure 80 

34. The periodical Cicada, side view, showing beak and ovipositor ? 81 

35. Abdomen of female, showing ovipositor and attachments 81 

36. Tip of ovipositor, much enlarged 81 

37. Cross section of ovipositor 82 

38. The musical apparatus of the periodical Cicada 83 

39. Pupal galleries of the Cicada 92 

40. Exit holes in soil 100 

41. Twigs showing egg punctures and illustrating manner of breaking ... 106 

42. Twig showing scars from punctures after the second year 106 

43. Cicada scars in hard-maple twigs after seventeen years 108 

44. The egg nest of the Cicada, showing nature of wound and arrangement 

of eggs 109 

45. Egg, much enlarged, showing young about to be disclosed Ill 

46. Newly hatched larva, greatly enlarged 112 

47. First larval stage, illustrating the larva at the beginning and end of 

this stage 118 

48. Second larval stage, illustrating the structure of the anterior leg 119 

49. Third larval stage, illustrating the structure of the anterior leg 120 

50. Fourth larval stage, illustrating larva and structure of anterior leg 120 

51. First pupal stage, illustrating the structure of the anterior leg 121 

52. Cecidomyiid egg parasite of the Cicada 129 

53. Egg parasite, Lathromeris dcada 130 

54. Female Sphecius (digger wasp) carrying a Cicada to her burrow 130 

55. Diagram of the burrows of the digger wasp 131 

56. Cicada tibicen with wasp egg attached to thorax '. 131 

57. Full-grown larva of the digger wasp in its burrow feeding on a Cicada. . . 132 

58. Larva of digger wasp with anatomical details; pupa of same, front and 

lateral views 132 

59. Digger wasp larva constructing its cocoon 133 

60. Cocoon of digger wasp, with enlarged section of breathing pore 134 

61. Mite egg parasite, Orihatella sp 134 

62. Mite egg parasite, Oripoda elongata 134 

63. Mite egg parasite, Oppia pilosa 135 

64. Mite egg parasite, Pediculoides ventricosus 136 

65. Mite egg parasite, Tyroglyphus cocdphilus 136 

66. Mite egg parasite, Iphis ovalis 137 

67. Mite egg parasite, Cheyletus sp 137 

68. Mite egg parasite, Bdella sp 138 




The periodical Cicada, often erroneously called the *^17-yeai 
locust," or merely the 'locust" — a term which should apply only 
to grasshoppers'* — is, in the curious features of its life history, 
undoubtedly the most anomalous and interesting of all the insects 
peculiar to the American Continent. This Cicada is especially 
remarkable in its adolescent period, the features of particular diver- 
gence from other insects being its long subterranean life of 13 or 17 
years, during all of which time its existence is unsuspected and 
unindicated by any superficial sign, and the perfect regularity with 
which at the end of these periods every generation, though numbering 
milUons of individuals, attains maturity at almost the same moment. 
To the naturalist, familiar in a general way with the peculiar habits 
of this Cicada, its regular periodic recurrence always arouses the 
keenest interest on accoimt of the anomalous life problems presented. 
To those unfamiliar with its habits, these sudden recurrences not 
only startle but often excite the gravest fears for the safety of trees 
and shrubs or even of annual plants. 

In view of the damage often occasioned by unusual insect out- 
breaks, such fears are not unreasonable, when, without warning, this 
Cicada suddenly emerges over greater or smaller areas, filling the 
ground from which it issues with innumerable exit holes, swarming 
over trees and shrubs, and making the air vibrate with its shrill, 
discordapt notes. During its short aerial life it leaves very decided 
marks of its presence in the egg slits which thickly fill all the smaller 
twigs and branches, the killing or injury of which causes some tem- 
porary harm and a sort of general twig pruning not especially inju- 
rious to forest trees, but more so to fruit trees, and very undesirable 
and disastrous to young trees and nursery stock. (See PI. I.) 

« The confusion of the Cicada with the true locust or grasshopper was a natural one 
and appeared in the earliest published notice of the Cicada (1666), and the name locust 
has ever since remained the popular designation of this insect. The sudden appear- 
ance of the Cicada in vast numbers very naturally recalled to the first observers the 
hordes of migratory locusts or grasshoppers of the Old World, as Say and Fitch early 

pointed out. 



Following briefly the history of the insect, the young ant-like larva, 
hatching from the egg a few weeks after the latter has been laid, 
escapes from the wounded limb, falls lightly to the ground, and 
quickly burrows out of sight, forming for itself a little subterranean 
chamber or cell over some rootlet, where it remains through winter 
and summer, buried from light, air, and sun and protected in a manner 
from cold and frost. It lives in absolute solitude, separated from its 
fellows, in its moist earthen chamber, rarely changing its position 
save as some accident to the nourishing rootlet may necessitate its 
seeking another. In this manner it passes the seventeen or thirteen 
years of its hypogeal existence in a dark cell in slow growth and 
preparation for a few weeks only of the society of its fellows and the 
enjoyment of the warmth and brightness of the sun and the fragrant 
air of early summer. During this brief period of aerial life it attends 
actively to the needs of continuing its species, is sluggish in move- 
ment, rarely taking wing, and seldom takes food. For four or five 
weeks the male sings his song of love and coiu^tship, and the female 
busies herself for a little longer period, perhaps, with the placing of 
the eggs which are to produce the subsequent generation thirteen or 
seventeen years later. At the close of its short adult existence the 
Cicada falls to the ground again, perhaps within a few feet of the 
point from which it issued, to be there dismembered and scattered 
about, carpeting the surface of the ground with its wings and the 
fragments of its body. Such in brief is the life round of this 
anomalous insect. 

So far as is known, other cicadas appear every year, usually in 
comparatively small numbers, and this yearly recurrence has led to 
the belief that the larval existence of these species is much shorter, 
if not limited to a single year. In the absence of direct experimental 
proof, however, it may be true that all cicadas have a long larval 
existence, and the absence of well-marked broods in other species 
or the complete breaking up or scattering of these broods, so that 
individuals emerge practically every year, have erroneously been 
taken to indicate a much shorter term of underground lif^.** 

If we can not satisfactorily explain the reason for the long larval 
life of the periodical Cicada or the conditions which led to the origin 

a The writer recalls that in the summer of 1885 a very large species of Cicada ( C. 
marginata Say) appeared in considerable numbers among the scrubby white oaks bor- 
dering a stream near Manhattan, Kans., and filled the air with its very loud and dis- 
cordant vibrations; yet, although familiar with and a frequent visitor of these woods 
in earlier and later years, no other experience with this particular species was had. 
It may be, therefore, that this species, which is more than twice the size of the period- 
ical Cicada, has an even longer life period. 

There are other western or Rocky Mountain species which give evidence of 
paralleling very closely in periodicity and number the eastern periodical Cicada. 
(See p. 36.) 

Bui. 71, Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 

Plate |. 

O s^ 

OS ^ ►-. 

-• C3 

(-5 '^ 
-SB p 

B (t ^ 
• ^ 

" 1—1 

se -^ 

ce B 

s « 

J*- ft) 

a SB 


o <t> 








SB « 
CO v' 








ty 9 




of this peculiarity, assuming it to be abnormal, we can at least see 
certain advantages coming to the species therefrom. Among these 
are the protection from attacks of parasitic enemies, since we can 
hardly conceive of a parasite limited to this Cicada which could pos- 
sibly extend its existence over an equal term of years. Its occur- 
rence, also, in overwhelming numbers at almost the same moment 
everywhere within the range of the brood prevents its being very 
often seriously checked in its adult stage by the attacks of birds 
and other vertebrate enemies, which fatten on it in enormous num- 
bers. For this species this is a most important consideration, for it is 
naturally sluggish and helpless and seems to lack almost completely 
the instinct of fear common to most other insects, and this leaves it 
an easy prey to insectivorous animals. The almost entire absence of 
fear and consequent effort to save itself from danger by flight or 
concealment is apparently a consequence of the long intervals between 
its aerial appearances. 

The greatest check on the species has been in the advent of Euro- 
peans on this continent and the accompanying clearing of woodlands 
and increase of settlement. The vast areas in the more densely popu- 
lated East, which were once thickly inhabited by one or the other of 
the broods of the periodical Cicada, are rapidly losing this character- 
istic, and the Cicada will doubtless appear in fewer and fewer numbers 
in all settled districts. A recent important factor which is assisting 
in this particular is the English sparrow, and it has been shown by 
Professor Riley and later observers that in and about cities nearly all 
of the few cicadas which still emerge under these more or less unfavor- 
able conditions are devoured by this voracious bird. On the other 
hand, as stated (p. 58), the first brood of these insects to be noted 
by the early New England colonists, namely, the swarm recorded for 
Plymouth for 1634, was just as abundant in 1906, the year when it 
last recurred, as ever. This is, however, not the normal condition, 
the wooded areas having been considerably maintained in Plymouth 
and Barnstable counties, whereas ordinarily such wooded areas have 
been greatly reduced or obliterated, and the Cicada in consequence 
slowly exterminated. 

The rapid disappearance of the Cicada, as a result of the clearing of 
forest areas and the conditions which accompany settlement, is nota- 
bly shown in the case of Brood XI, which formerly occupied a compact 
territory in the valley of the Connecticut River in the States of Massa- 
chusetts and Connecticut. In a letter to the writer, Mr. George 
Dimmock, who has made a special study of this brood in the northern 
part of the town of Sufiield, Conn., says: ' ' When I saw them in 1869 
the cicadas were so abundant that small bushes and undergrowth in 
the rather sparse woods in which they occurred were weighted down 
with them.'' In 1886 he was unable to visit the region, but was 


informed that very few of the insects appeared that year. In 
explanation of this he writes: ^'The woodland in the vicinity has 
been steadily reduced and the cicadas, of which there are records 
going back about a century, seem to be dying out. The owner of the 
land where the cicadas apj>eared (a man born in 1815, died in 1892) 
informed me that the rate of reduction was so rapid that he doubted 
if any of them would appear in 1903/' 

To the lover of nature there is something regrettable in this slow 
extermination of an insect which presents, as does the j>eriodical 
Cicada, so much that is interesting and anomalous in its habits and 
life history. During the long periods of past time the species has 
recurred with absolute regularity except as influenced by notable 
changes in the natural topographical conditions and the despoliation 
of forests which has followed the path of settlement by the white man. 
It is interesting, therefore, in thought to trace the history of this 
species backward, taking, as time measures, its periodic recurrences, 
until in retrospect it is possible to fancy its shrill notes jarring on the 
ears of the early colonists or listened to in the woodlands bordering 
the ocean by the still earlier discoverers and explorers. Still more 
remotelf one can picture its song causing wonderment to the savage 
Indians who attributed to it baleful influences, and yet, less dainty 
than their white followers, used the soft, newly emerged cicadas as 
food; or further back in time, when it had only wild animals as 
auditors. With these long-time measures our brief periods of days, 
weeks, months, and years seem trivial enough. 


Much obscurity must always attach to the past history of this insect 
and the origin of its peculiar habits, and notably the causes and con- 
ditions which have led to the establishment of the long underground 
existence and the equally extraordinary regularity in time of emer- 
gence at the end of this period. Explanations may, however, be sug- 
gested for some of its peculiarities as presented in its life at the present 
time — as, for example, the origin of the two distinct races, one with a 
17-year period and the other with a 13-year period, with both of 
which a small variety occurs, and the existence of a multitude of dis- 
tinct broods occupying the same or different territory and appearing 
in different years but with absolute regularity of periods. 


One of the greatest difficulties in solving the problem of the broods 
of this insect and their geographical limits was removed by the dis- 
covery of the existence of two distinct races — namely, one requiring 
seventeen years for its development and limited geographically, in a 


general way, to the northern half of the range of the species, and 
the other requiring but thirteen years for its development and cover- 
ing the southern half of the range of the species. 

This interesting and very important fact was first discovered, it 
seems, by Dr. D. L. Phar^, then of Woodville, Miss., who announced 
the 13-year period for the southern broods in a local paper — the 
Woodville (Miss.) Republican, May 17, 1845. As this paper had only 
a local circulation the significance of this discovery was lost sight of 
and probably never came to the attention of naturalists: and it was 
not until 1868, when Dr. B. D. Walsh and Prof. C. V. Riley arrived at 
the same conclusion and published, in a joint article in the Ameri- 
can Entomologist," a mass of accumulated observations bearing 
thereon, that the 13-year period for the southern broods came to be 
generally accepted. 

In Professor Riley's first report on the insects of Missouri, pub- 
lished the following year (1869), the joint article just referred to was 
reproduced substantially without change, except for a revision of the 
classification oi the broods, based on data obtained chiefly from a very 
valuable unpublished monograph entitled ^ ^ The American locust," 
etc., by Dr. Gideon B. Smith, of Baltimore, Md. 

This manuscript paper, on the authority of Professor Riley, was 
communicated to him by Dr. J. G. Morris, of Baltimore, some four 
months after the publication of the existence of the 13-year race by 
Walsh and Riley, but in time for use in the preparation of the article 
for the First Missouri Report. In it the existence of the 13-year 
Southern race, occurring in several broods, is fully recorded by Doc- 
tor Smith in connection with the use of the specific name ^^trededmJ' 
(See Appendix.) 

After the existence of the 13-year Southern race was again brought 
into prominence by Walsh and Riley, Doctor Phares published an 
article in the Southern Field and Factory, Jackson, Miss., April, 1873, 
in which he called attention to his earlier publication, cited above, 
where he seems to have controverted the belief that there is no 13- 
year brood, evidently entertained up to that time by Doctor Smith, 
with whom Doctor Phares was in correspondence, and also to an 
article published May 5, 1858, in the Republican, where he used the 
title ''Cicada tredecim.^' Doctor Smith later evidently accepted the 
conclusions of Doctor Phares and introduced them in his last revi- 
sion of his manuscript memoir, which Professer Riley saw and used. 
To Doctor Phares, therefore, belongs the honor of having made the 
discovery of the 13-year period for the Southern broods. Neverthe- 
less, but for the independent work of Walsh and Riley, the knowl- 
edge of the 13-year broods might have been long lacking, and, in the 

oVol. I, pp. 63-72, December, 1868. 


nonpublication of Doctor Smith's monograph,^ these broods would 
have failed ot the abundant proof on which they now rest. The race 
name of tredecim for the 13-year broods was suggested by Walsh and 
Riley without knowledge of its earlier use by Doctor Phares. The 
latter's early articles in the Republican are Jpst altogether, the author 
himself not being able to recover them in later years, and the credit 
for the name tredecim for the 13-year race, following the customary 
rules, should go to Walsh and Riley. 

The discovery of the 13-year Southern race was of vast assistance 
in clearing up the confusion which had attended the study of the 
different broods of this insect and enabled Walsh and Riley to sepa- 
rate some sixteen distinct broods, three of which belong to the tre- 
decim race, and later enabled Professor Riley, with the aid of Doctor 
Smith's paper, to increase the number of tredecim broods to seven 
and the total of the broods to twenty-two, twenty-one of which the 
records of subsequent appearances have proved to be valid. 

Doctor Smith's remarks in his manuscript chapter on geographical 
tribes and districts present the status of the 17-year and 13-year 
races very clearly. He says: 

There are two divisions or tribes, differing from each other only in the periods of 
their lives; the one and much the larger division living 17 years, and the other 
13; hence the impropriety of the specific name «e/)ferM/€cim. * * * The anatomy 
of the insects of both divisions is precisely the same, but septende&im does not of 
course apply to the Southern division, whose lives are but 13 years. Shall we call 
the latter Cicada tredecim? Why there is this differen<!e in the periods of lives of the 
two tribes we can not explain. It is not the climate that causes it, as a moment's 
reflection will prove. If that were the cause the difference would be more gradual. 
For example, in northern New York they would have been, say, 17 years; in Pennsyl- 
vania, 16; in Maryland and Virginia, 15; in North Carolina and Tennessee, 14, and 
in South Carolina, etc., 13 years in completing their existence. But that is not the 
case. The difference of years takes place abruptly on and about the line of 34° 
and 35° of north latitude, on the north side of which the period is 17 years and on 
the south 13 years. 

While Doctor Smith is hardly justified in the last statement, it is 
nevertheless true that the 17-year race is northern and the 13-year 
race is southern. The territory of the two races is graphically shown 
m figures 2 and 3, and is described in detail and mapped for all the 
broods in a later section. 

In this bulletin the two forms of the periodical Cicada have been 
designated as ^' races/' adopting the position taken by Professor Riley 
and the majority of the writers on this insect, rather than consider- 
ing them to be distinct species, as is held by some specialists. Pro- 
fessor Riley and others opposed the idea of their being specifically 
distinct, not only because of their practical identity in general char- 

oA summary, with extracts, of this manuscript made by Professor Riley is the 
writer's source of information on this valuable paper, which, while containing much 
^rror and wrong inference, yet indicates careful study and accurate observation. 


acteristics and habits, but also on the ground of external structure, 
no material difference in this respect having been noted between the 
two races, although it was known that the individuals did not cross 
when they appeared together. Doctor Walsh was very finnly of the 
opinion, on the other hand, that they represent two distinct species, 
yet in a letter to Mr. Darwin he described the 13-year race as an 
incipient species, to which, for convenience, it is desirable to give a 
distinctive name." His published views on the subject, given in a 
posthumous paper, are quoted below.^ Referring to the impossi- 
bility of distinguishing species in certain genera by a mere compari- 
son of the perlect specimens, he says: 

Upon the same principle I strongly incline to believe that the 17-year form of the 
periodical Cicada (C septendedm Linn.) is a distinct species from the 13-year form 
(C. tredecim (Walsh and Rileyc) Riley), although it has been impossible for me, on 
the closest examination of very numerous specimens, to detect any specific differ- 
ence between these two forms. It is very true that the 13-year form is confined to the 
more southerly regions of the United States, while the 17-year form is generally, but 
not universally, peculiar to the Northern States; whence it has been, with some show 
of plausibility, inferred that the 13-year form is nothing but the 17-year form accel- 
erated in its metamorphosis by the influence of a hot southern climate. But, as these 
two forms interlock and overlap each other in various localities, and as it frequently 
happens that particular broods of the two forms come out in the same year, we should 
certainly expect that if the forms belonged to the same species they would occasionally 
intercross, whence would arise an intermediate variety having a periodic time of 
14, 15, or 16 years. As this does not appear to have taken place, but, on the contrary, 
there is a pretty sharp dividing line between the habits of the two forms, without 
any intermediate grades of any consequence, I infer that the internal organization of 
the two forms must be distinct, although externally, when placed side by side, they 
are exactly alike. Otherwise, what possible reason could there be for one and the 
same species to lie under ground in the larva state for nearly 17 years in one county 
and in the next adjoining county to lie under ground in the larva state for scarcely 13 
years? I presume that even the most bigoted believer in the old theory of species 
would allow that, if it can once be proved to his satisfaction that two apparently 
identical forms are always structurally distinct, whether in their external or their 
internal organization, they must necessarily be distinct species. 

The reasons urged by Doctor Walsh give a strong basis of proba- 
bility to the theory of the specific distinctness of the two races, and 
particularly the fact that where the broods overlap there seems to be 
no interbreeding. Doctor Walsh's position has been upheld by 
Dr. Wm. H. Ashmead, who states that in a very careful examination 

o See Index to Missouri Entomological Reports, Bui. 6, U. S. Ent. Comm., p. 58. 

& American Entomologist, Vol. II, p. 335. 

c Taking the ground that Doctor Phares can not be credited with the race name 
"tredecim " on account of the ephemeral character of the journal in which he employed 
it, the credit should go to Walsh-Riley, since the article in the American Entomolo- 
gist of December, 1868, where it was next suggested, was a joint or editorial one. 
Professor Riley himself sanctions this course in the Bibliography of Economic 
Entomology, Part II, p. 61, No. 474. 

31117— No. 71—07 2 


of the material in the National Museum he has observed small but 
constant differences between the two races in the shape of the last 
ventral segment of both the male and the female. 

For the present purpose, however, it seems wiser to consider the 
13-year broods as representing a race merely, or an incipient species, 
as suggested by Walsh, because of the absolute resemblance in prac- 
tically every feature of structure, coloration, and habit, in the two 
forms, which exhibit the single important point of difference repre- 
sented by the four years' variation in the length of their subterranean 

While in the matter of interbreeding they may be distinct, as the 
records seem to prove conclusively, the two races represent one 
species for all practical purposes and differ in a very striking manner 
from all other species of the family Cicadidse. One race is unques- 
tionably the oflfshoot of the other, the original differentiation being 
probably caused by some variation in climatic conditions. 

It is, perhaps, a hopeless task, and at best only a matter of conjec- 
ture, to attempt to explain the phenomenon of what is practically the 
same insect requiring in one part of the country seventeen years for 
its underground development through its preliminary stages and in 
another section thirteen years, in the face of the fact that while, in the 
main, the two sections are, respectively, northern and southern, yet at 
the point of juncture the broods of the two races overlap. That the 
17-year period does not depend so much on the greater severity of the 
northern winters is evident, protected as the insect is by the depth of 
its burrows, and the natural explanation is that the longer period of 
warmth in the South hastens the development of the insect, or, in other 
words, that the difference in the length of the warm growing period 
during which the insect can thrive and increase in size in the southern 
half of its range enables it to go through its development in four years 
less time than in the North, where shorter summers and consequently 
shorter periods of growth occur. The chief objections to this theory, 
but not necessarily controverting it, are those made by Doctors 
Smith and Walsh in the quotations given. The problem is, however, 
a very interesting one, and some light may be thrown upon it by 
further experiments similar to those described under the head fol- 


The anomaly presented of two distinct periods for the completion of 
the adolescent stages of the periodical Cicada, exhibited by the 13-year 
and 17-year races, and its apparent basis in climate led Professor Riley 
to institute some careful experiments in transferring the eggs of the 
13-year race, collected in various Southern States, to different locali- 
ties in the North, and conversely, eggs of the 17-year race collected in 
the North to localities in the South, to determine the actual influence 


of temperature or whether the 13-year race would maintain its normal 
period in the North and the 17-year race in the South. The object of 
the experiment, in other words, was to determine whether the differ- 
ence in time of. development between the two races is really one of 
climate and temperature only or whether a fixed characteristic has 
been acquired, not subject to much, if any, modification with changing 
temperature conditions. That the separation was originally caused 
by differences in climate in different parts of the range of the species 
can not be doubted, but the fact that the two races often overlap in the 
adjoining territory of their respective ranges would seem to indicate 
that this time period has become in the course of ages a rather 
permanent feature. 

Doctor Kiley's early experiments in this direction were in 1881 
with the 13-year Brood XIX, but the eggs distributed were in such 
condition that it is doubtful if they hatched, and the eflfort failed. 

A much more elaborate test was instituted in the summer of 1885, 
in connection with the joint appearance that year of the 13-year 
Brood XXIII, which returned in 1898, and the 17-year Brood X, 
which returned in 1902. All possible precautions were observed not 
only to collect the egg-bearing twigs at the right moment and to 
distribute them in fresh, healthy condition, but to see also that they 
were properly placed under suitable trees and that a record was made 
in each instiance of the exact locality. Furthermore, most of the 
transfers were kept under observation for a time to see that the eggs 
actually hatched and the larvae entered the soil in their new situations. 
The record of these transfers is given in detail in the report of the 
Entomologist, Report of the Department of Agriculture for 1885, 
pages 254-257, and was reproduced in Bulletin 14 as Appendix A. 
The eggs of the 13-year brood were collected in Mississippi between 
July 6 and 17, and distributed to entomologists in New York, Iowa, 
Massachusetts, and Maine in eleven lots. The eggs of the 17-year 
Brood X were collected in Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, 
chiefly in the latter State, between July 6 and 21, and distributed in 
seventeen different lots to correspondents or entomologists in Georgia, 
Mississippi, Alabama, and Missouri. The preliminary report on the 
condition of this material is given in the appendix cited of Bulletin 14. 
The only positive record received was from Prof. Eugene A. Smith, 
University of Alabama, who found in 1898 one pupal shell and 
noticed several holes in the ground which answered to the description 
of exit openings made by the Cicada. The pupal shell was sent to me 
and proved to belong to the periodical species. That it comes from 
the eggs planted in 1885 seems probable, from the fact that no brood 
was due in this locality in 1898, and this would seem to indicate that 
the 17-year brood may be greatly abbreviated or reduced to the 
13-year term in a warmer latitude. Part of the eggs sent to Professor 


Smith came from Indiana and the rest from Michigan. Too muen 
importance, however, can not be given to this isolated experience. 
Correspondence was kept up with as many of the points as could be 
reached during the next four years, but no further records were 

Nothing whatever came of the 13-year material sent to northern 

The difficulty in an experiment of this kind lies in the long term 
over which it extends, and the inevitable changes of local conditions 
and the removal or death of observers intrusted with the experiment. 
It is necessary, as demonstrated by a later test (see pp. 114-116) of 
egg transfers, to have an enormous quantity of eggs to insure the insects 
going through the entire term undestroyed by natural enemies or 


In connection with the discussion of the 13-year and 17-year races of 
the Cicada, it is interesting to note also that in both races the insect 
occurs in two distinct types, viz, a large form and a small form, 
the former comprising the bulk of the individuals of the brood and 
the latter more rare and often unobserved. The existence of these 
two types was commented upon as early as 1830 by Doctor Hildreth, 
of Marietta, Ohio,** and was especially remarked in the great Cicada 
year 1868. The typical larger Cicada (fig. 1, A) measures on an 
average 1\ inches from the head to the tip of the closed wings and 
expands over 3 inches. The underside of the abdomen is of a dull 
orange-brown color and in the male four or five segments are of the 
same color on the back. The smaller form is rarely more than two- 
thirds the size of the larger, and usually lacks altogether the light 
abdominal markings, although they are sometimes represented on 
the edge of the segments beneath. 

The small form (fig. 1, B) was described in 1851 as a distinct species, 
Cicada cassiniij by Dr. J. C. Fisher. * The contention that it repre- 
sents a distinct species was urged particularly on the ground that there 
exists a variation in the genitalia, but this variation has since been 
shown by Professor Riley not to be constant, and specimens Are to be 
found in both sizes which present the same structure in these parts. 

In view of the close anatomical correspondence, except in size, of 
the two forms and the fact that they always occur together in the same 
broods and have the same anomalous subterranean period of larval 
and pupal life, the specific importance of the smaller Cicada has been 
naturally open to question, and in Bulletin 14 the writer was inclined 

o Silliman's Journal, XVIII, p. 47. 

bProc. Acad. Nat. Sc. Phila., Vol. V., p. 272. 


ijty or, more properly, a 

jin divergences in habits 

ijBpin. It seemed to be the 

']^M somewhat earlier, from 

jjd^yj'the smaller form disap- 

'tnT^tte larger. The smaller 

' ■" ira as being more or less 

with the lai^er ones but 

*ix thickets along streams 

I'oi the small form was 

'as not fully confirmed. 

•in the case of Brood X 

.. .,.. >- ■ 

l^'^*'^^'^V^|>4I^' cicada: A, male at Cyjdoal 

' "-■"-""'Jf^*^gfBl «. d. genital hooks enlarged; g, 

pe^lSsff. natural size: B, male o[ the unaU 

p^^Hll^^tural size: e,f, genital hooks, en- 

, . C 'a'(:»|&»lej' and Hagen.) 

ifl^*'^^- Both sexes were rep- 
_,)ed to go on normally as 
ig-p dwarf Cicada were dis- 

le lai^e Cicada, namely, 

fltf^ loud. The abundance 
in its song notes were 
range of the brood, 

size and character- 
connection with the 
Prof. Herbert Osbom." 
il measurements of some 
[ts localities. The results 

i^cember, 1902. 


of these measurements indicated a decided constancy for each variety 
and for each sex of each variety in wing lengths and widths and body 
lengths. The color variation was also very constant. The abdomen 
of the cdssinii form is normally entirely black beneath, only rare 
specimens showing a narrow hind border of yellowish or orange 
yellow. The cross veins also on the wing forming the W mark are 
commonly less black, and the W therefore short.ened. This point, 
however, as in the normal form, seems subject to wider variation 
than the other features. 

There is a difference in genitalia, but apparently not enough to 
exclude the idea of crossing, and, according to Riley, this difference 
is not constant. In the mating, out of seventy pairs observed there 
was no instance of cassinii pairing with the normal large form, 
evidencing an apparently complete isolation by sexual selection. 
Professor Osborn shows, therefore, that there is no ground for con- 
sidering the small form as a dimorphic or seasonal stage of the large. 

Professor Osborn infers that the cdssinii is a derived form, since it 
appears less commonly than the other and probably has a more 
restricted range, and suggests that it may be possibly a "depauperate 
variety'' which has become in the course of ages fully established, 
especially with Brood X, being very rare with Broods III and XIII, 
which he had also studied. He concludes: "Whether this form be 
called a variety, subspecies, or species, is, it seems to me, of less 
importance than a recognition of its distinctness, and the determina- 
tion, if possible, of its phylogenetic relationship." 

The nomenclature of the species, variety, and races of the periodical 
Cicada adopted by the writer is the same as that followed in Bulletin 
14, namely, the- Liimaean species Tibicen {Cicada) septendeciirij with 
the tredecim race of Walsh and Riley, and the variety cassinn of Fisher. 


The subject of the broods of the periodical Cicada presents a number 
of interesting fields of inquiry, such as the consideration of the origin 
of the broods, their chronological history and classification, and their 
exact geographical limits or distribution. These topics will be taken 
up somewhat in detail, with the exception of the chronological history 
of the appearances during the last two hundred years and accompany- 
ing voluminous historical records, which, for reasons to be later noted, 
have been largely omitted. 

The Origin op the Broods. 

It is not necessarily true, but it is a reasonable inference, that in the 
early period of the existence of the periodical Cicada on this continent 
it was represented by a single brood. Assuming this to have been the 


case, the Cicada would have appeared everywhere over its range in the 
same year and probably at about the same time. In the long course of 
ages, with the consequent important changes — geographic, climatic, 
and topographic — this original brood became gradually broken up into 
many broods, with constantly increasing divergence in the dates of 
appearance, so that at the present time nearly every year has its 
brood, or broods, each of which is limited, as a rule, to well-defined 
districts, and each reappearing at the proper intervals with absolute 
regularity. Of the upward of twenty broods which have been differ- 
entiated, most of them have been carefully studied, chronological 
records collected, and the limits of distribution fairly well determined. 
For convenience of reference, these, broods have been designated by 
Roman numerals, as Brood VI, Brood XXVI, etc. 

The origin of distinct broods in an insect possessing as long a 
developing period as the one under discussion is not difficult of expla- 
nation. It is a well-known phenomenon in connection with insect life 
that, whatever may be the period of development of a species, certain 
individuals will often, for some reason or other, such as insufficient 
or unsuitable food, unfavorable temperature, or other conditions, be 
delayed or retarded, while others, for reasons the converse of the last, 
namely, conditions exceptionally favorable, will develop more rapidly 
or will be accelerated and appear earlier. Therefore, under the former 
conditions we have a longer and under the latter conditions a shorter 
life period. 

This is true to a slight degree at the present time of the periodical 
Cicada, and especially with the larger broods has it been noticed that 
scattering individuals appear the year before and others the year after 
the great brood year. It is not difficult to imagine, therefore, that 
under exceptional conditions some of the earlier appearing individuals 
or the later ones may occur in sufficient numbers to establish a well- 
marked peculiarity in this direction and form a new brood appearing a 
year earlier or a year later than the original one. If in the long course 
of years some accident should happen to the parent brood in that 
portion of its range the derivative brood might be left to hold the 
territory alone or to become the predominant swarm. 

This explanation is supported also by the fact that it often happens 
that the broods of two successive years occupy contiguous territory, 
as, for example, the 13-year Brood XXII, which last appeared in 1897, 
is distributed between Vicksburg and New Orleans, or just south of 
the 13-year brood which appeared in 1898. It is reasonable to infer, 
therefore, that Brood XXII is simply a strong, well-established colony 
of accelerated individuals from the southern end of Brood XXIII, 
with a 13-year period terminating one year earlier than that of the 
parent brood. The conditions which led to the emergence of the 
insect below Vicksburg in twelve years some time in the remote past 


being temporary, this portion of the old brood resumed the normal 
13-year period. 

Another marked instance of the same kind is shown in the relations 
between Brood XI and Brood X, the former being merely an appen- 
dix or a continuation in a northeasterly direction of the territory occu- 
pied by the eastern branch of Brood X, which always precedes Brood 
XI by one year. The interrelations of these and all the other broods 
are indicated in the discussion of the distribution of the Cicada. 

Local or temporary conditions which have caused a moderate 
change in the time of emergence of the Cicada are on record, one 
notable instance resulting from an artificial heating of the soil by hot 
pipes (see p. 90). 

A similar instance of acceleration of Brood XIII, due in 1905, but 
amounting to a full year, occurred in 1904 in a greenhouse at Belvidere, 
111. The owner, Mr. B. Eldredge, writes that in 1888 he moved from 
Chicago to Belvidere, and found everything covered with locusts, 
and an enormous amount of damage to all kinds of shrubs and trees 
was done. At the time he bought the place it was covered with an old 
apple orchard, and the locusts worked very abundantly in these trees. 
Some seven years afterwards these trees were grubbed out and the 
ground covered with greenhouses, and the ground so protected had 
been kept warm winter and summer ever since. Mr. Eldredge is 
convinced, and he is undoubtedly right in this belief, that this con- 
tinual heat and absence of frost accounts for the appearance of the 
locusts in his greenhouses a year ahead of time. 

He states that the locusts appeared in quantity. Before the mat- 
ter was brought to the writer's attention they had largely disappeared, 
but two adult locusts were submitted and a lot of shed skins, which 
fully confirmed the identification of the insect. It would be rather 
interesting to know more about the local conditions to determine how 
the cicadas were able to survive in soil from which the vegetation 
must have been entirely removed. 

An instance of a few weeks acceleration under outdoor conditions 
is given by Mr. Schwarz.* Commenting on the slightly earlier emer- 
gence of individuals of Brood XIV near Harpers Ferry, W. Va., in 
1889, in a small clearing surrounded by woods, Mr. Schwarz urges 
that a clearing made in the midst of a dense forest forms a natural 
hothouse, the soil receiving in such places much more warmth than 
in the shady woods. That the cicadas should appear a little earlier 
in such situations is not remarkable, and he suggests also that under 
favorable circumstances the Cicada might develop on such cleared 
places one or more years in advance of the normal time, and that 
these precursors, if numerous enough, would be able to form a new 

aProc. Ent. Soc. Wash., I, p. 230. 


It is possible to conceive also of conditions which would result in 
the acceleration or retardation in the development of an entire brood 
or broods of the Cicada, such as variation in climatic conditions, 
geological changes, or changed conditions of the topography of the 
country, including the character of the vegetation. 

In this or other ways, at any rate, the Cicada has become broken 
up into a large number of distinct broods, often covering different 
territory, but not necessarily so doing, each, however, maintaining 
its regular time of appearance. 

The slight but constant tendency to variation which has brought 
into existence the broods now so well marked, continued indefinitely, 
would so break up and scatter the present broods as to ultimately 
obscure them altogether, and the overlapping of districts and the 
variation in time of appearance would lead to a rather general occur- 
rence every year of the periodical Cicada throughout its range, the 
long period for development, however, still persisting. Anticipating 
such an outcome from the intermixture and overlapping merely of 
different broods. Doctor Smith (Smith MS.) rather mournfully says: 
" In those times, if these sayings of mine should be thought of, they 
will be ridiculed as a superstitious legend of the olden times.'' 

The Classification op the Broods. 

In the first edition of this bulletin the numerical designation of the 
broods of the two races suggested by Professor Riley was followed. 
This numbering has, however, objectionable features and obscures 
the relations of the broods of each race to each other. To overcome 
these objections a new system of numbering was proposed by the 
writer,^ which has since been generally adopted. The reasons for 
making this change and the numerical designations proposed are here 
reproduced with little change from the publication cited. 

The earlier writers, viz. Prof. Nat. Potter, Dr. William T. Harris, 
and Dr. G. B. Smith, classified the broods solely according to the 
years of their appearance. The unpublished register left by Doctor 
Smith includes every important brood now known classified accord- 
ing to race, and gives the localities for one additional brood, the 
existence of which seems not to have been confirmed. Though 
lacking any special designation for the broods, Doctor Smith's classi- 
fication is as complete and accurate as that published by Doctor 
Riley and since followed by all later writers. ^ Dr. Asa Fitch was the 
first to introduce a numbering system for the different broods, enu- 
merating nine altogether, but his data were very limited and he was 
not aware of the thirteen-year southern period, and there necessarily 
resulted no little confusion of the broods of the two races. The 

oBuU. 18, n. 8., Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, pp. 52-58, 1898. 
& See Appendix. 



Walsh-Riley enumeration of 1878 gave the records for sixteen broods, 
which were designated by Roman numerals from I to XVI, the enumer- 
ation being based on the sequence of the different broods after 1868. 
In 1869, in his First Missouri Report, Professor Riley, having in the 
meantime secured the manuscript paper of Doctor Smith, added the 
six broods from this paper not represented in the Walsh-Riley enu- 
meration, increasing the number of the broods to XXII, and renum- 
bered them again in accordance with their sequence, beginning with 
1869. These broods vary enormously in their extent, some of them 
being represented by scattered colonies, which perhaps have no real 
relationship in point of origin, and others covering nearly uniformly 
vast stretches of territory extending over several States together. 
Several are rather unimportant, or lack confirmation, and one of 
them. Brood III, was founded on an erroneous record and has been 

In the enumeration of the broods by Walsh-Riley, and later by 
Riley, the two races are mixed together and a sequence of numbers 
given which, after the first thirteen years, lost all significance as a 
record of the order of the broods in time of appearance, and from 
the first obscured the true kinship of the broods in each race. If, on 
the other hand, each race be considered separately and its broods be 
arranged in a series in accordance with their sequence in time, an 
important natural relationship in point of origin and distribution is 
plainly indicated. 

Taking first the broods of the 17-year race, as Riley numbered them, 
it will be seen from the subjoined table that if the enumeration begin 
with Brood XI, the 17-year broods follow each other in regular succes- 
sion for eleven consecutive years, then after a break of one year fol- 
low Broods V and VIII, and after another break of one year Brood 
IX. Another break of one year precedes the next recurrence of Brood 
XI, with which the series starts. 

Chronological order of the Riley broods of the Cicada from 1893 to 1910. 
































Taking up the 13-year broods in the same way, it will be seen that 
if the enumeration start with Brood XVI, a 13-year brood follows in 
regular succession for six years. With the exception of the very 
doubtful Brood X, which is separated from the last 13-year brood by 


three years, there follow seven successive years in which no 13-year 
broods occur. 

Under the supposition that the different broods of the 17-year and 
13-year races sprang in the remote past from an original brood of 
each, it would naturally follow that the broods most closely related 
in time would also present a closer relationship in their range, and 
this, in fact, proves to be generally true. 

To show this relationship &nd to indicate the natural order of their 
occurrence, I have suggested a new enumeration of the broods in 
which the two races are separated — the 17-year broods coming first, 
followed, for convenience merely, by the 13-year broods. Thus 
Brood XI of the 17-year race becomes Brood I, and the others are 
numbered in the regular order of their occurrence, except that I 
have assigned a brood number to each of the seventeen years. This 
leaves Broods XII, XV, and XVII, as newly numbered, without 
any definite colonies, so far accepted, as representatives of established 
broods. As will be shown later, however, there are records which 
indicate the existence of small or scattering broods filling the three 
gaps mentioned in the 17-year series. 

In renumbering the broods of the 13-year race I have continued 
for convenience from the end of the series of the 17-year race, the first 
13-year brood becoming Brood XVIII, and I have assigned brood 
numbers to each year of the 13-year period, making a total enumera- 
tion of the broods of both races of XXX. As already indicated, six 
of the numbers given to the 13-year race have had no brood assigned 
to them, although records have been secured which seem to indicate 
the existence of scattering broods filling some of the gaps, as will be 
noted in the records given further on. 

It does not necessarily follow, in fact it is quite unlikely, that Brood 
I, as here designated, is the original or oldest brood of the 17-year 
race. Undoubtedly some of the 17-year broods, perhaps half or more 
of them, originated by retardation of individuals, and perhaps half 
by acceleration of individuals; so that the original brood, if it still 
exists, is more likely to be one of the intermediate ones. B'rood X, 
being the largest of the 17-year broods, perhaps has best claim to 
this distinction. 

For the same reasons an intermediate brood in the 13-year series 
is doubtless the original brood of the 13-year race, and this title may 
possibly belong to Brood XIX, which has the widest range of all the 
broods of the 13-year race. The fewer number of broods in this race 
would seem to indicate that it is of later origin than the 17-year race, 
and this belief is further justified by the fact of its occupying, in the 
main, a territory of later geological formation. 

The following table, beginning with 1893, when the initial broods 
of both the 17-year and the 13-year series appeared in conjunction, 



illustrates the new nomenclature suggested, and in parallel columns 
also are given the corresponding nomenclatures proposed by Professor 
Riley, by Fitch, and the year records in Doctor Smith's register: 

Ncrmenclature of the broods of the periodical Cicada. 

Broods ol the 17-year race. 

Broods of the 13-year ] 









































































































The Relationship op the Different Broods. 

As a rule, the relationship of the broods in point of distribution 
agrees with their kinship as indicated by their sequence in time of 
appearance. The relationship indicated by the latter, viz, their 
sequence in time, is doubtless untrustworthy as indicating origin, in 
some instances on account of the uncertainty arising from the action 
of the principle of retardation on the one hand and acceleration on 
the other in the forming of new broods. 

In the case of a widely scattered brood, like Brood VI, it is quite 
possible that certain swarms originated from a later-appearing brood 
by retardation of individuals, and other swarms from an earlier 
brood by acceleration in time of appearance of individuals.* 

This same condition may be true of other of the more scattered 
broods, but with the broods presenting a compact range a singleness 
of origin is evident. 

Examination of the distribution of the broods in connection with 
their sequence in time of appearance indicates, however, a certain 

a Prof. W. E. Castle, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, Mass., in a letter 
to the writer July 20, 1898, suggested a plausible theory for Brood VI. The isolation 
and wide distribution of this brood leads him to infer that it may be a relatively old 
or ** played out '* brood, and if this be true it may be considered the parent of Broods 
V and VII, the former an offshoot by acceleration and the latter by retardation of 
development. He suggests, howevejf, that the Pennsylvania portion of Brood VII 
may have originated independently of the New York part, since it lies in the moun- 
tainous country, where the broods would naturally be mixed up more than in any 
other part of the range of the 17-year race. In Ohio he notes that the distinct areas 


relationship between the different broods in point of origin, which 
may be indicated as follows: 


From the standpoint of distribution the broods of the 17-year race 
may be grouped as follows: (1) Broods I and II; (2) Broods III and 
IV; (3) Brood V; (4) Brood VI; (5) Broods VII, VIII, IX, X, and 
XI; (6) Broods XII, XIII, XIV, and XV; (7) Broods XVI and 
XVII, the last connecting again with Brood I. 

Taking up these broods in regular order: 

The main body of Brood I occupies territory immediately west of 
the more important and perhaps parent Brood II, and also presents 
a number of colonies extending westward to Kansas. Broods I and 
II seem, therefore, closely allied in point of origin. 

Brood III presents little, if any, relationship to Brood II in point 
of location and distribution, but is closely allied to the following 
brood, IV, and the latter is evidently a retarded western and southern 
extension of III. 

Brood V presents little relationship with Brood IV in point of dis- 
tribution and covers a very compact territory. 

Brood VI, being a widely scattered one, and occurring usually in 
small numbers, does not seem to present any particular relationship 
with any of the preceding or following broods unless the explanation 
suggested by Professor Castle be accepted. 

Brood VII is local in distribution and not very important, and is 
divided into two sections by the territory occupied by the following 
brood, VIII, with which it thus seems to be closely allied. Brood 
IX is very distinctly a southern extension of Broods VII and VIII. 
These three broods seem, therefore, to be closely allied in their 
origin, and, curiously enough, occupy territory which divides the 
two main sections of the great 17-year Brood X, which next follows 
in regular succession, and is perhaps the oldest or parent brood of 
the 17-year race. Brood XI, following X, is evidently an extreme 
northeastern extension of the latter. 

Brood XII is represented by a series of very doubtful records, 
which, if validated in future return periods, will connect the western 

covered by Brood VI lie for the most part just outside the area covered by Brood V 
and on opposite sides of the latter. 

This interpretation by Professor Castle may be in part correct; but in view 
of the ^ide range of this brood and the very scattering nature and separation of 
the individual swarms, it seems to me more probable to account for it as a develop- 
ment of scattering broods originating for the most part independently by means of 
retardation or acceleration from other broods, and none of the colonies developing 
enough to fill and hold any very large definite territory. In other words, most of the 
colonies are probably of late origin rather than the remnants of an old, extensive, 
worn-out brood. 


Brood XIII with group 5. Brood XIII is the principal western rep- 
resentative of group 6, which, through the three broods XIII, XIV, 
and XV, extends from the extreme western to the eastern hmits of 
the Cicada. Brood XIV has a very wide range to the eastward of 
XIII, and connects with the latter through the colonies in northern 
Illinois and Indiana. Brood XV is limited to the Atlantic seaboard 
and connects directly with the eastern colonies of XIV. 

Brood XVI is based on somewhat doubtful records and is unim- 
portant- Brood XVII is intermediate between Brood XVI and 
Brood I, its western, colonies connected with the former and the 
eastern colonies with the latter. 


The broods of the 13-year race break up into the following natural 
groups: (1) Related closely to Brood XIX, and comprising Broods 
XVIII, XIX, and XX; and (2) related to Brood XXIII, and com- 
prising Broods XXI, XXII, XXIII, and our new Brood XXIV. 

The first of these broods. Brood XVIII, is a rather insignificant 
one and is undoubtedly an eastern extension or offshoot of the great 
13-year Brood XIX, which succeeds it. Brood XX, is undoubtedly a 
section of Brood XIX retarded one year, just as Brood XVIII 
consists of accelerated swarms of the same. 

Brood XXI, separated from Brood XIX by two years, seems to 
bear little relationship to the latter, and a more logical arrangement 
consists in connecting it with Brood XXIII through Brood XXII, 
of which last it may be considered as an eastern and northern exten- 
sion. Brood XXII is a very* marked instance of the formation of a 
new brood by an acceleration in time of the appearance of a portion 
of a larger and older brood. Its relationship with Brood XXIII is 
very marked and can not be questioned. Brood XXIII, the main 
representative of this group, is followed by the new Brood XXIV, 
which is evidently a retarded swarm of the preceding brood. 

Of Broods XXVI and the new Broods XXIX and XXX, both of 
which need verification, no significant relationship can be pointed 
out. Brood XXIX is very doubtful, and the records are possibly 
based on a confusion with the 17-year race. 

Sources of Error in the Old Records. 

In examining the records of the distribution of the broods of the 
periodical Cicada, it is seen that considerable imcertainty attaches 
to the data of certain broods, not only from the fact of their covering, 
in greater or less degree, territory occupied by both races, but more 
particularly because the records are frequently based on years in which 
broods so overlapping have appeared in conjunction. 


In the case of the broods of the 17-year race, the following extend 
on their southern boundaries into the territory of the 13-year race, 
and hence the records of the southern localities are open to some 
question: Broods VI, X, XIV, XVI, I, IV, to a slight extent also 
in the case of Broods II arid III, and doubtfully in the case of Brood 
IX, the possibility of confusion in this last brooH depending on the 
accuracy of the extreme northeastern extension of the 13-yeaf Brood 

The following broods of the 13-year race extend northward into the 
territory occupied by the 17-year race, and hence are open to some 
question: Broods XXIII, XVIII, XIX, and XX. 

The records can not be questioned on this ground of the 17-year 
Broods VII, VIII, XI, XIII, and V, and of the 13-year Broods XXIV, 
XXI, and XXII, because these broods are limited in distribution 
to the territory of a single race. 

The most notable instance of the overlapping and consequent prob- 
able confusion of the records is seen in the case of Brood X of the 
17-year race with Broods XXIII and XIX of the 13-year race. The 
remarkable feature in the distribution of the broods named is the 
notable extension northward in Illinois and Missouri of the 13-year 
Broods XXIII and XIX, which fills almost exactly a district which 
would naturally be supposed to belong to the 17-year race and prob- 
ably to Brood X. As pointed out in Bulletin 14^ page 26, this circum- 
stance had special significance in view of the fact that the northward 
extension of the 13-year race is based on Broods XIX and XXIII, 
and that the records prior to 1898 of the former were collected for the 
most part in 1868, when this brood was in conjunction with Brood X, 
and of the latter in 1885, when Brood XXIII was also in conjunction 
with Brood X, the limits of which, curiously enough, stop rather 
suddenly at or near the eastern State line of Illinois. The possi- 
bility was immediately suggested that the northern localities assigned 
to Broods* XIX and XXIII properly belong to Brood X. 

The occasion of the reappearance of the 13-year Brood XXIII in 
1898 without any important 17-year brood to confuse the records 
and of the 17-year Brood X in 1902, also without a joint occurrence 
of any important 13-year brood, gave the opportunity wished for to 
determine the validity of old records and to fix more accurately the 
distribution of the three broods concerned. 

A very thorough canvass was made in 1898 of the territory covered 
by Brood XXIII, and especially the territory in doubt, by calling 
into requisition the very numerous county correspondents of the 
Statistical Division of the Department of Agriculture and also of the 
Weather Service in addition to the regular correspondents of the 
Division of Entomology, Several thousand replies were received, 


negative and positive. Reports were also kindly submitted by 
Professor Forbes, of Illinois, which added four or five counties to 
the records obtained for that State, and other reports were received 
from entomologists of other States covered by this brood. A pre- 
liminary report was published in Bulletin 14, and a full report in 
Bulletin 18, of this Bureau. The records obtained confirmed the 
general accuracy of the old belief of the distribution of Brood XXIII. 
The occurrence of scattering colonies of the 17-year Brood VI over 
some of the territory adds a slight element of doubt; but in the 
main the records given for Brood XXIII, taken in connection with 
older records, are probably correctly assigned. 

The data obtained of the 17-year Brood X in 1902 is even more 
satisfactory, inasmuch as in this case there was no 13-year brood to 
throw doubt on any of the records. The same means was taken to 
get full reports as were used in 1898; and, rather to our surprise, the 
substantial correctness of the old records is strikingly demonstrated, 
as seen on the map published in connection with the detailed discus- 
sion of this brood. Thirteen-year Brood XXIII covers southern 
Illinois, with a scattering outpost through southern Indiana. Brood 
X stops, as hitherto believed, near the eastern line of Illinois, with 
a few scattering outposts. There is overlapping, but, in the main, 
south-central and western Illinois and eastern and central Missouri 
seem to belong to the 13-year race, as hitherto believed. 

The recurrence this year of the great 13-year Brood XIX without 
any 17-year brood to confuse the records will give an opportunity 
to complete the data relative to the distribution of these three over- 
lapping broods, but the records already obtained of Broods X and 
XXIII indicate very strongly the probable correctness of the old 
records of Brood XIX. 

Many of the other scattering records of 13-year broods northward, 
or of 17-year broods southward, may possibly be based on similar con- 
fusions, arising from the overlapping of broods of the two races. 

The only way to accurately define the range of the different broods 
is to imdertake with each recurrence a thorough and systematic 
investigation of all the territory open to the least doubt. Such work 
has been repeatedly instituted, and particularly since 1868, and many 
of the more strictly limited broods have been very carefully recorded, 
and their distribution has been satisfactorily defined. Work of this 
kind has been done for Brood III in Iowa by Professor Bessey, and 
for Brood V in Ohio and West Virginia by Professors Webster and 
Hopkins. Similar work has been done for Brood II in New York 
and New Jersey by Doctors Lintner and Smith, and for X and XXIII 
by Riley in 1885, and for Brood XIX by Walsh and Riley in 1868. 


The value of a thorough and systematic canvass of the territory 
supposed to be covered by any brood is exhibited in much of the 
work referred to above, and notably in the case of Brood V studied 
by Professors Webster and Hopkins in Ohio and West Virginia. In 
the case of this brood, however, there was no difficulty from an 
association with any 13-year brood. 

Broods op 14, 15, or 16 Year Periods. 

The most notable thing about the periodical Cicada is the regularity 
with which it has reappeared during more than 200 years of records 
at the stated intervals of 13 years for the Southern race and 17 years 
for the Northern race. If all the cicadas belonged to a 13-year or*a 
17-year period — in other words, if there were but one period — this 
regularity would be less surprising. But the records are so complete 
and full that there can be no doubt whatever of the absolute 
uniformity of periods for the two races for the vast majority of the 
individuals. That unusual conditions will, however, hasten the 
development or retard it a year or more has been already indicated 
on page 24, together with notable examples of artificial acceleration. 
In view of these last instances there can be no doubt that this regu- 
larity of appearance is governed more by the uniformity of tempera- 
ture conditions over a long period of years than from any inherent 
qualities in the insect itself. If these conditions are interfered with, 
however, the Cicada becomes, as it did in the greenhouse at Belvi- 
dere, 111., accelerated one year; and if such conditions occurred in 
nature over a large area, as already indicated, a new brood would be 
established, but not a 16-year brood, because the climatic conditions 
over the long period of seventeen years would, and evidently have in 
practically every instance, carried these accelerated or, conversely, 
retarded individuals forward or back to the normal period. There 
are, however, a few records which seem to indicate, and particularly 
in the overlapping territory of the two broods, a variation in the 
length of the subterranean period. These reports of 14-year, 15-year, 
or 16-year broods have been so very scanty that it has not been possi- 
ble to trace them out with any accuracy, but there seems to be no 
reason whatever for doubting the possibility of swarms which have 
actually developed and maintained for a time these intermediate 
periods. In the course of years we may get enough of these records 
to definitely map some of these variant broods. 
31117— No. 71—07 3 



Future Appearances. 

During the next seventeen years broods of the 17-year and 13-year 
races of the periodical Cicada will occur as. follows: 

Table of future appearances. 


1910. . 
1912. . 
1914. . 
1915. . 

17-year race. 




13-year race. 
















No record 



Year. ' 17-year race. 


13-year race. 


Minor. . . 


No record. 














Minor. . . 








Major . . 







New?. . . 



In this table the large or important broods are designated as 
major; the small or scattering broods as minor. In the latter class 
the new and often doubtful broods suggested by the writer also fall. 
In the case of a few numbers assigned to the 13-year race no records 
of occurrence have been reported, but such may be forthcoming at 
any time, although it is evident that the breaking up of the 13-year 
race into broods has not proceeded to anything like the extent that 
it has in the 17-year race. 

It will be noticed that as a rule a 17-year and 13-year race are 
associated in the same year. This is purely accidental, and in point 
of fact the same two broods could only come together once in 221 
years. The greatest Cicada year of recent times was 1868, when 
Brood X, the largest of the 17-year race, appeared in conjunction 
with Brood XIX, the largest of the 13-year race. These two broods 
will have their next joint occurrence in the year 2089, when perhaps 
the increase of settlement and the changed character of vegetation 
and superficial conditions over their respective ranges may have 
entirely eliminated them except for stragglers. 



The records on which are based the present information of the dis- 
tribution of the several broods of the periodical Cicada have been the 
accumulation of more than two hundred years, and particularly dur- 
ing the last fifty years they have assumed a most voluminous char- 
acter, and any effort to discuss the subject at all minutely would 
expand this publication beyond reasonable limits. It is impossible, 
therefore, to detail the evidence which has been used in determining 
brood limits or even to summarize the voluminous historical and 
chronological records on which this distribution rests. All that is 
possible is to continue the plan followed in Bulletin 14 of limiting 


the record to a brief description of the different broods and merely 
noting the distribution by States and counties. The data for these 
summaries is the rather full account given in Bulletin 8, old series, of 
the Division of Entomology, supplemented, however, by the local 
studies made by entomologists and others in various States, and par- 
ticulariy the voluminous records obtained by this Bureau, collated 
and classified up to 1898 by Mr. E. A. Schwarz, who had long assisted 
Professor Riley in collecting such data. Since 1898 this field of 
inquiry has been imder the charge of the writer, and a very thorough- 
going effort has been made to get full and accurate data of the 
broods which have appeared from year to year. The records for the 
important 13-year Brood XXIII, which appeared in 1898, in conjunc- 
tion with the 17-year Brood VI, and of Brood X, the largest of all 
the 17-year broods, which appeared in 1902, were especially complete 
and satisfactory, and are summarized under the accounts of these 
broods. Particularly in later years, much exact information as to 
local distribution has come from the active cooperation of State 
entomologists, who have often been able to get more detailed and 
accurate reports than was possible through the correspondents of this 
office. The scant records, indicating perhaps scattering or incipient 
broods, covering some of the blanks in the 13 and 17 year series, are 
introduced in their proper order for future confirmation or rejection. 
The records obtained by the Department of Agriculture, covering 
nearly thirty years, have become very voluminous, and during the 
last few years an effort has been made to go over all of these records 
and transfer the important information to index cards, and all the 
later records are being kept on such cards. It is expected also, as 
time offers, to incorporate in this record all the data from experi- 
ment station bulletins and other printed records. Ultimately, there- 
fore, we shall have a classified card record which will be easily avail- 
able for examination and study and which will assist greatly in estab- 
lishing brood limits and determining the status of new reports. 


Taking all the different broods together, this Cicada is known to 
occur pretty generally within the United States east of the one 
hundredth meridian and northward of latitude 30° — in other words, 
east of central Kansas and north of northern Florida. No broods 
have been found in northern New England except a doubtful record 
in Vermont, nor west of the Mississippi above Iowa. The State of 
Rhode Island, in which the Cicada was long believed to be absent, 
proved to harbor a small brood, as discovered in 1903 (Brood XI). 
The most eastward occurrences are the swarms occurring in Barn- 
stable Count}^, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, and on the island of Marthas 
Vineyard. No colonies have been foimd on the peninsula of Florida, 



although the Cicada occurs in the northwestern portion of the State. 
The western records reported in Bulletin 14 in Colorado, and doubt- 
ful occurrences along the northern slope of the Big Horn Mountains 
of western Wyoming and Montana, have been shown, with very little 
doubt, to belong to another species of Cicada (Tibicen cruentifera 
Uhl. and allies), very possibly also similarly periodic in reappearance. 
The territory covered by the periodical Cicada is graphically illus- 
trated by the two maps showing the range of the 13-year and the 
17-year races, respectively (figs. 2 and 3). A brief examination of 
these maps develops the very interesting and suggestive fact that if 
superimposed the areas occupied by the two races would, in a gen- 

FiG. 2. — ^Map showing distribution of the broods of the 13-year race. 

eral way, fit together along their adjoining sides. This was to have 
been expected, but one would hardly have predicted the notable 
northern extension of the 13-year race in Missouri and Illinois in the 
Mississippi Valley, following, however, in an exaggerated way, the 
isothermal lines of this region. The extension northward of the 13- 
year race very greatly exceeds the limits of the Lower -Austral zone, 
as marked on Merriam's map, and if this insect were taken as a basis 
this zone would have to be very greatly extended northward in the 
two States named. With this important exception, the 13-year race 
is confined pretty closely to the Lower Austral and the 17-year race 
covers the Upper Austral, with large extensions northward into the 



Transition zone. The overlapping of the two races, discussed else- 
where, is well illustrated by these two maps. 

The range of the individual broods is undoubtedly much greater 
than the limits now assigned, since the records until recent years 
have been largely based on notable and dense swarms and have 
rarely taken into account the scattering individuals, which undoubt- 
edly extend over a much greater territory and usually pass unno- 
ticed. The very careful records secured of the broods, including and 
subsequent to 1898, have shown much of this scattering occurrence 
beyond the denser brood limits, as will be seen in the maps illus- 
trating these broods. This indicates that the breaking up of the 

FiQ. 3. — Map showing distribution of the broods of the 17-year race. 

Cicada has already gone much farther than was hitherto supposed, 
and points to the ultimate disappearance of great broods as such 
and their replacement as scattering individuals every year. The dis- 
appearance of the great broods, however, is not to be anticipated 
in the very near future, and may not come about for a thousand or 
even several thousand years. This is shown by the fact that the 
broods first seen by the early colonists in New England on Cape 
Cod, at Plymouth, and on Marthas Vineyard are, as elsewhere noted, 
still practically unreduced in numbers and make just as startling an 
impression as ever. This is due to the fact that much woodland 
remains undisturbed in these localities. In other places, where the 
woods have been largely removed as the result of settlement, the 
Cicada has correspondingly disappeared. 




In the following description of the broods they are taken up in 
their numerical order — ^first, the 17-year broods, I to XVII, and then 
the 13-year broods, XVIII to XXX; that is, as many of the latter 
as have definite records. The chronological order of the broods, show- 
ing the broods of the two races which occur jointly in the same year, 
is indicated in the table on page 34. This arrangement, rather 
than a chronological one, is adopted for the reason that any chrono- 
logical arrangement in the course of a few years becomes obsolete, 
and for the same reason individual maps of the broods have been 
made, rather than joining in one map the two broods that may hap- 
pen to occur together on each of the next thirteen or seventeen years. 
The maps of important broods which have been recently more care- 
fully studied have been entirely revised, and the importance of the 
records has been indicated by the size of the dots, the large dots 
representing counties in which the brood occurred in one or more 
dense characteristic swarms and the small dots, records of scatter- 
ing occurrence or of doubtful validity. These same conditions are 
more accurately shown in the State and county records, as described 
under each brood. Such indications will be secured for all the broods 
in course of time, and will give a much more accurate picture of 
actual conditions than the old system of uniform dots for all records. 
The maps of broods which have not been recently studied have also 
been reengraved because of the discovery of new records — ^in some 
cases few in number, in other cases of considerable amount. 

Broods of the Seventeeri^Year Race, 

Brood I — Septendecim — 1910. (Fig. 4.) 

Brood I is the first of the series of well-authenticated broods of 
the 17-year race, and its main swarms occupy the territory immedi- 
ately west of the more important Brood II, which follows the year 
after. It includes also widely separated swarms extending west into 
Kansas. It was established originally on data given by Dr. Gideon B. 
Smith, but its distribution is now more definitely recorded as a result 
of the study given it in 1893 by Professor Riley and of records which 
have come to this Bureau in connection with the study of other 
broods since that time. Several new counties for West Virginia 
were added by Doctor Hopkins in Bulletin 68, West Virginia Experi- 
ment Station (1900). 

The doubtful records prior to 1893 were those relating to the occur- 
rence of this brood in Kansas and Colorado. The localities in Kansas 
received doubtful confirmation in 1893. The Colorado localities 
remained unverified, although the district mentioned was visited 



and special search was made for evidence of the insect. Undoubtedly 
the Colorado occurrence relates to some other and probably also a 
periodic species, such as that reported for another brood at Boulder, 
Colo. (XVI), and for Brood VI in Montana. 

The distribution, by States and coimties, follows: 

District op Columbia. — North of Washington. 

Illinois. — ^Madison(?). 

Indiana. — Kjiox, Posey, Sullivan. 

Kansas. — Dickinson, Leavenworth. 

Kentucky. — ^Trimble. 

Maryland. — Prince George, south half of St. Mary. 

FiQ. 4.— Map showing distribution of Brood 1, 1910. 

North Carolina. — From Raleigh, Wake County, to northern line of State; Cabarrus, 
Davie, Iredell, Rowan, Surry, Yadkin. 

Pennsylvania. — ^Adams, Cumberland, Franklin. 

Virginia. — From Petersburg, Dinwiddie County, to southern line of State; Bed- 
ford, King William, New Kent, Rockbridge; valley from Potomac to Tennessee and 
North Carolina boundary. 

West Virginia. — Orant, Hardy, Pendleton, Randolph. 

Brood II — Septendedm — 1911. (Fig. 5.) 

This brood occupies, for the most part, territory immediately east 
of Brood I, and is one of the best recorded of the broods, since its 
almost exclusively eastern range brings it in the immediate vicinity 



of the large towns and more densely populated districts of the Atlantic 

Fitch described its limits as his Brood No. 2, Walsh-Riley as Brood 
VIII, and Riley as his Brood XII. It has been reported in Con- 
necticut regularly every seventeen years since 1724, and in New 
Jersey since 1775, if not earlier, and almost equally long records of 
it in other States have been made. 

On the occasion of its last appearance, in 1894, its distribution in 
New Jersey was very carefully studied by Prof. J. B. Smith, confirm- 
ing its occurrence in every county in that State, and in New York 

Fio. 5. — Map showing distribution of Brood II, 1911. 

similar studies were made by Dr. J. A. Lintner. The Bureau also 
received a vast number of reports. from these and other States in 
answer to a circular prepared by Professor Riley and mailed in May, 
1894. Some of the southern records obtained in 1894 are doubtful, 
and this applies especially to the localities in North Carolina, because 
of the occurrence that year also of Brood XIX of the 13-year race. 

The distribution as listed below is based on the old records given in 
the circular cited, with such additions and corrections as the reports of 
appearance in 1894 made necessary. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

Connecticut. — Fairfield, Hartford, Litchfield, Middlesex, New Haven. 
District op Columbia. — Throughout. 



Indiana. — Dearborn, Poaey(?). 

Maryland. — ^Anne Arundel, Calvert, Charles, Prince George, St. Mary. 

Michigan. — Kalamazoo. 

New Jersey. — Entire State. 

New York. — Albany, Columbia, Dutchess, Greene, Orange, Putnam, Rensselaer, 
Rockland, Saratoga, Ulster, Washington, Westchester, and on Staten Island and Long 

North Carolina. — ^Bertie(?), Davie(?), For8yth(?), Guilford, Orange, Rocking- 
ham, Rowan, Stokes, Surry, Wake(?), Warren(?), Yadkin(?). 

Pennsylvania. — Berks, Bucks, Chester, Dauphin, Delaware, Lancaster, Lebanon, 
Lehigh, Montgomery, Northampton, Philadelphia, Pike, Potter, Schuylkill, Wyoming. 

Virginia. — Albemarle, Alexandria, Amherst, Appomattox, Bedford, Buckingham, 

FiQ. 6.— Map showing distribution of Brood III, 1912. 

Campbell, Caroline, Charlotte, Culpeper, Fairfax, Fauquier, Fluvanna, Goochland, 
Hanover, Henrico, James City, Loudoun, Louisa, Lunenburg, Madison, Page, Pitt- 
sylvania, Powhatan, Prince Edward, Rappahannock, Spottsylvania, Stafford. 
West Virginia. — Brooke(?). 

Brood III — Septendedm — 1912. (Fig. 6.) 

This brood, described by Walsh-Riley as Brood IX (XIII of Riley) 
is one of the more important of the Western 17-year broods, its 
most compact body lying in the States of Iowa and Missouri. It is 
closely allied in distribution to Brood IV, but shows little relation- 
ship with Brood II. Records are given by Dr. G. B. Smith in both 
Iowa and Illinois in 1844, and it has been regulariy recorded since. 



over at least a portion of its range. The Iowa distribution of the 
brood was carefully studied by Professor Bessey in 1878. 

The range of the brood as given below is based on the published 
records, together with a number of additional localities collected from 
the correspondence of the Bureau. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

Illinois. — Champaign, Fulton, Hancock, McDonough, Maaon, Warren. 

Iowa.— Adair, Adams, Audubon, Boone, Cass, Dallas, Davis, Decatur, Des Moines, 
Greene, Hamilton, Henry, Iowa, Jasper, Jefferson, Johnson, Keokuk, Ix)ui8a, Mad- 
ison, Mahaska, Marion, Marshall, Monroe, Muscatine, Polk, Poweshiek, Ringgold, 
Scott, Story, Taylor, Union, Van Buren, Wapello, W^arren, Wayne, Webster. 

F.IG. 7. — ^Map showing distribution of Brood IV, 1913. 

Missouri. — Bates, Buchanan, Clark (?), Grundy, Henry, Johnson, Knox (?), 
Lewis (?), Macon (?), Marion (?), Monroe (?), Putnam, Ralls (?), Randolph (?), Schuy- 
ler (?), Scotland (?), Shelby. 

Nebraska. — Johnson. 

Ohio. — Champaign. 

West Virginia. — ^Monongalia. 

Brood lY—Septendecim—inZ. (Fig. 7.) 

This brood, described by Walsh-Riley as Brood X (Riley XIV) 
succeeds Brood III by one year, and in the main appears to be a 
southwestern extension of the latter, covering a portion of south- 
western Iowa, eastern Kansas, and Indian Territory, with detached 
localities in Missouri and other States. Its original connection with 


Brood III is apparently well shown by the adjoining or overlapping 
territory occupied by the two broods, together with the fact of their 
separation by a single year. 

This brood was well recorded in 1879, the data being published by 
Professor Riley in Bulletin 8, old series, of the Division of Ento- 
mology. A number of additional records were obtained at its last 
appearance in 1896, and reports have been received since the publica- 
tion of Bulletin 14 adding five new counties in northwestern Missouri. 

The distribution of the brood as now determined is as follows : 

Arkansas. — Hempstead (?). 

Indian Territory. — ^Muscogee, Tulsa. 

Iowa. — Adams, Cass, Dallas, Fremont, Mills, Montgomery, Page, Pottawattamie, 

Kansas. — Allen, Bourbon, Chase, Coffey, Douglas, Greenwood, Jackson, Johnson, 
Labette, Lyon, Marion, Morris, Osage, Pottawatomie, Wabaunsee, Wilson, Woodson, 

Missouri. — Barton, Buchanan, Caldwell, Dekalb, Grundy, Henry, Holt, Jack- 
son, Johnson, Lafayette, Mercer, Ray, Saline, Vernon. 

Nebraska. — Otoe. 

Texas. — Cooke, Denton, Fannin, Kaufman, Wise. 

Brood V — Septendedm — 1914. (Fig. 8.) 

Brood V covers in the main a rather compact territory and does not 
connect directly with preceding broods, except possibly through 
Brood VI, joining the following important series of broods of the 
Alleghany region. Brood V was reported from Ohio as early as 1795. 
Fitch described it as Brood 5, Walsh-Riley as Brood XI, and Riley 
as Brood XV. 

The limits of this brood as known prior to 1897, the date of its last 
appearance, were given by Mr. Schwarz in Circular No. 22 of this 
Bureau. In 1897 its distribution in Ohio was very carefully studied 
and mapped by Prof essor Webster and in West .Virginia by Professor 
Hopkins. The distribution as listed below is based on the above in- 
formation, together with numerous records which have since been 
obtained by this Bureau in the investigation of this and other broods. 

The distribution, by State and counties, of this brood as now known 
is as follows : 

Ohio. — Ashland, Athens, Belmont, Carroll, Columbiana, Coshocton, Crawford, Cuya- 
hoga, Delaware, Erie, Fairfield, Franklin, Gallia, Geauga, Guernsey, Harrison, Hock- 
ing, Holmes, Huron, Jackson, Jefferson, Knox, Lake, Licking, Lorain, Mahoning, 
Medina, Meigs, Monroe, Morgan, Muskingum, Noble, Perry, Pickaway, Pike, 
Portage, Richland, Ross, Sandusky, Scioto, Seneca, Stark, Summit, Tuscarawas, 
Vinton, Washington, Wayne. 

Pennsylvania. — Fayette, Greene, Washington. 

Virginia. — Augusta, Caroline, Highland(?), Shenandoah. 

West Virginia. — Barbour, Boone, Braxton, Brooke, Calhoun, Clay, Doddridge, 
Fayette, Gilmer, Grant, Greenbrier(?), Hancock, Hardy, Harrison, Jackson, Kana- 



wha, Lewis. Marion, Marshall, Mason, Mineral, Monongalia, Nicholas, Ohio, Pleas- 
ants, Pocahontas, Preston, Putnam, Randolph, Ritchie, Roane, Summers(?), Taylor, 
Tucker, Tyler, Upshur, Wayne, Webster, Wetzel, Wirt, Wood. 

Brood VI — Septendedtn — 1915. (Fig. 9.) 

This is an unimportant scattering brood designated as No. 7 by- 
Fitch, XII by Walsh-Riley, and XVII by Riley. It is difficult to 
assign any very pointed relationship for this brood, either with pre-r 
ceding or following broods, unless one adopts the suggestion made by 
Prof. W. E. Castle that it represents a relatively old or played-ou4>. 
brood, and may thus be considered the parent of Broods V and VJI, 

FlQ. 8.— Map showing distribution of Brood V, 1914. 

the former the offshoot by acceleration and the latter by retardation 
of development. (See pp. 28-29.) As stated elsewhere, however, it is 
more likely to be an assemblage of swarms of diverse origin. 

This brood, while not an important one, covers a much wider ter- 
ritory than any of the other 17-year broods. With the exception, 
however, of the two extremes of its distribution in the Northwest 
and the Southeast, respectively, the records are of scatteriog indi- 
viduals, in many localities only a few specimens being observed. To 
illustrate this graphically on the accompanying map (fig. 9), the 
small dots indicate localities where only a few specimens were 
observed or captured or a doubtful record and the large dots localities 



represented by one or more dense swarms, such as are ordinarily 
characteristic of the species. Some of these records of scattering 
occurrence may be based on stragglers from preceding broods or 
accelerated individuals from following broods and therefore may not 
mean more than incipient swarms. Many of the records were secured 
in 1898, when a very careful canvass of the whole Cicada region was 
made by this Bureau with the assistance of the State entomologists. 
The reports obtained in 1898, if they may be relied upon, extend 
the range of the periodical Cicada in Wisconsin and Michigan much 
farther north than any of the old records. The localities assigned 
to this brood in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, and in 

Fig. 9.— Map showing distribution of Brood VI, 1915. 

eastern Kentucky and Tennessee are, in the main, in counties in the 
elevated mountainous district, and the correctness of the reference 
to this brood is established by earlier records as well as indicated by 
the elevation. 

Reports of the occurrence of this brood in Montana were sent in by 
Mr. E. V. Wilcox, with the statement that the insect occurred in 
small numbers in the counties of Chouteau, Flathead, Gallatin, and 
Missoula, and that in the latter county some damage was done to 
young apple trees. This report was published in Bulletin 18 of this 
Bureau, but doubts arose afterwards in the mind of the writer as to 
the correctness of the determination of the Cicada, as the more 


recently acquired knowledge of the existence of another periodical 
species in the northwestern United States threw some doubt on this 
reference, and an examination of collected material from that region 
indicates that the species referred to is Tibicen cruentifera Uhl., 
which apparently is also periodic and has other habits closely- 
resembling septendecim. 

The records of distribution given below are as published in Bulletin 
18 of this Bureau, with the exception of West Virginia, where a good 
many counties have been added from Doctor Hopkins's Bulletin 68 
and from later records secured by him. The starred counties indi- 
cate the occurrence of the Cicada in one or more characteristic dense 
swarms; the italicized counties are confirmations of old records, and 
the counties inclosed in parentheses are old records not reported in 
1898. The distribution, by States and counties, follows: 

Delaware. — Newcastle. 

District of Columbia. — Several localities. 

Georgia. — Dade,* Elbert, Floyd, Habersham,* Hall,* Paulding, Rabun,* Spalding, 

Illinois. — Dewitt,* Douglas, Knox, McLean, Montgomery, Scott, Shelby,* Ver- 

Indiana. — ^Boone, Brown, Carroll, Grant, Johnson, Laporte, Wells. 

Kentucky. — Letcher.* 

Maryland. — Carroll, Cecil, Montgomery, Prince George, Washington. 

Michigan. — ^Barry, (Cass?), Chippewa, Genesee,* Houghton,* Kent(?), Macomb(?), 
Newaygo(?), Ogemaw(?), Otsego,* Shiawassee,* Washtenaw. 

New Jersey. — Bergen, Cumberland, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, 
Morris, Passaic, Somerset, Union. 

New York. — Greene, New York, Richmond, Schenectady, (Westchester). 

North Carolina. — Alexander,* Bladen, Buncombe, Burke,* Cabatrus, Caldwell,* 
Catawba,* Henderson,* Iredell, Lincoln,* McDowell,* Macon,* Montgomery, 
Moore, Pender,* Polk,* Ilandolph(?), Rutherford, Swain,* Transylvania,* 
Union,* Washington (?), Wilkes.* 

Ohio. — (Ashtabula), Carroll, Champaign, Columbiana, Delaware, Madison, Mahoning, 
Montgomery, Morrow, Pickaway, Shelby, (Summit?), Union, (Vinton?). 

Pennsylvania. — Bucks, (Dauphin), (Lancaster), Montgomery, (Northampton and 
adjoining counties), (Philadelphia), Westjnoreland. 

South Carolina. — Oconee.* 

Tennessee. — ^Bradley, Greene, Hamilton, Jefferson, Knox, Meigs, Polk, Sullivan. 

Virginia. — Charlotte, Chesterfield, Fairfax, Powhatan, Prince Edward, (Smyth). 

West Virginia. — ^Berkeley, Brooke, Clay, Fayette, Grant, Hampshire, Hancock, 
Hardy, Jefferson, Marshall, Mineral, Monongalia, Monroe, Morgan, Ohio, Pendle- 
ton, Pocahontas, Preston, Raleigh, Tucker, Tyler, Webster. 

Wisconsin. — ^Burnett,* Columbia, Crawford, Dane,* Fond du Lac, Green Lake,* (La 
Crosse), Marquette,* Sauk,* Sawyer, Washburn, Waushara.* 

Brood Yll— Septendecim— 1916. (Fig. 10.) 

This brood was founded by Professor Riley in 1869 on Doctor 
Smithes register, in which it is recorded from 1797 to 1848 as occurring 
in certain counties in western New York. As indicated elsewhere, 



this brood is not very important and is divided into two sections by 
the following brood, VIII. 

The confirmations of the occurrence of this brood in New York in 
later years are reported in Bulletin No. 8, old series, Division of 
Entomology. The localities in Pennsylvania and West Virginia are 
based on later Divisional records. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

New York. — Cayuga, Livingston, Madison, Monroe, Onondaga, Ontario, Wyoming, 

Pennsylvania. — Allegheny, Washington . 
West Virginia. — Summers?. 

Fig. 10.— Map showing distribution of Brood VII, 1916. 
Brood Ylll—Septendecim—1917. (Fig. 11.) 

This is Fitch's second brood which he described as occurring in 
western New York, western Pennsylvania, and eastern Ohio, and is 
Brood XIV of Walsh-Riley, and XX of Riley. Dr. G. B. Smith also 
gives valuable data relative to its appearance and distribution. 

It is one of the smaller broods and did not attract much attention 
on its appearance in 1883, but records of a number of additional 
swarms were obtained on the occasion of its appearance in 1900. 
The main territory covered by it is a rather compact one, lying in 
western Pennsylvania, eastern Ohio, and the panhandle of West Vir- 
ginia. The swarms in the area thus included probably originated 



by retardation from Brood VII, owing to mountain conditions as 
aflFecting temperature. 

The widely separated swarm occurring on Marthas Vineyard has 
exceptional interest on account of the abundance of the insect and 
its extreme eastern location. This swarm has been well recorded 
since the time of Harris, and in 1900, when it last appeared, was 
reported by Prof. H. T. Femald as being as abundant as ever. 

Of the other scattering swarms the ones in western New York and 
in northern Illinois and in South Carolina are old records but ex- 
tremely doubtful, and possibly based on confusion of some annual 
species of Cicada with the periodical species. No confirmations of 

Fig. U.— Map showing distribution of Brood VIII, 1917. 

these records were obtained in 1900. New records were, however, 
obtained for New Jersey, Maryland, and North Carolina considerably 
away from the main body of the brood and very possibly having a 
different origin. None of the records in these three States represents 
important swarms, but merely scattering individuals. Some new 
records were obtained also in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, 
which, however, fall in with the general range of the main body of the 

The county indications in the list below are as with other recently 
studied broods, i. e., the star (*) means occurrence in swarms; italics, 
confirmation of old records; and parentheses (), failure to secure such 



confinnation. The large dots on the map indicate starred counties 
and the small ones doubtful records or scattered presence. 
The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

Illinois. — (Whiteside) (?). 
Maryland . — ^Harford . 

Massachusetts. — Dukes* {Marthas Vineyard). 
New Jersey. — Essex. 
New York. — (Chautauqua) (?). 
North Carolina. — Moore (?). 

Ohio. — ^Behnont, Carroll* Co{um6iana,* Hamilton, Jefferson* Mahoning *ToTtage* 
Stark,* Trumbull* 

Pennsylvania. — Allegheny, Armstrong * Beaver* Butler,* Cambria* Clarion* 

Fig. 12.— Map showing distribution of Brood IX, 1918. 

Crawford, Fayette, (Forest), Huntingdon, Indiana'* (Jefferson), Lawrence,* Mercer* 
(Snyder), Venango* Washington* Westmoreland. 

South Carolina. — Barnwell (?). 

West Virginia. — Brooke,* Hancock,* (Marshall), Ohio. 

Brood IX— iSep^endecim— 1918. (Fig. 12.) 

In the main this brood (XV Walsh-Riley, XXI Riley) covers a 
rather compact territory, extending fiom the southern part of West 
Virginia across Virginia into North Carolina, and is the southern 
extension of Brood VIII one year retarded. Some widely separated 
swarms have been reported from Ohio and one from northern Vir- 
31117— No. 71—07 4 


ginia, and one or two in northern West Virginia, but ir the main these 
are doubtful records or unimportant, and may possibly not be con- 
nected in origin with the swarms occurring in the main territory of the 
brood. Since the publication of Bulletin 14 several additional coun- 
ties have been reported for Virginia and West Virginia, the new 
records for the latter State being chiefly from a very careful survey 
made by Doctor Hopkins in 1901. Equally careful search would 
doubtless show for adjoining States the wide scattering occurrence 
which Doctor Hopkins has found in West Virginia. The unimportant 
records are indicated on the map by the small dots. 

The occurrence of a swarm on Marthas Vineyard in 1833 is recorded 
by Doctor Harris, but the records of subsequent appearances of this 
swarm have shown the date mentioned to be unquestionably an error 
for 1832, which refers this swarm to Brood VIII. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows:* 

North Carolina. — Alleghany * (Wilkes*). 

Ohio. — Cuyahoga, Madison?, (Medina?). 

Virginia. & — Bland* Buchanan,* Carroll,* (Craig),* Floyd,* Franklin* (Giles),* 
(Grayson),* (Henry),* Lee,* (Loudoun), (Montgomery),* Patrick,* (Pulaski),* 
(Roanoke),* Smyth* Wythe.* 

West Virginia. — Barbour, Berkeley, Boone,* Braxton,* Clay,* Fayette,* Green- 
brier* Hampshire, Hardy, Harrison, Jackson, Jefferson, Kanawha, Logan, Marshall, 
Mason, Mercer,* Monongalia, Monroe* Nicholas,* Pleasants, Pocahontas,* Preston,* 
Putnam, Raleigh* Randolph,* Roane, Summers* Tucker, Tyler, Upshur, Webster, 
Wetzel, Wood, Wyoming.* 

Brood X^Septendedm — 1919. (Fig. 13.) 

This is the great 17-year brood occurring over the main areas 
covered by it in numerous dense swarms and equaling, if not exceeding 
in importance the largest of the 13-year broods, namely, Brood XIX. 
It is Brood No. 4 of Fitch, XVI of Walsh-Riley, and XXII of Riley. 
It has been well recorded, particularly in the East, from 1715 to 1902, 
the date of its last appearance. It so happened, however, that on 
each of the years (1868 and 1885) when it w^as especially studied 
prior to 1902 it appeared in conjunction with an important 13-year 
brood, and as the territories of the two races overlap, there has always 
been some doubt as to the correctness of the references of swarms in 
such overlapping regions. In 1868, when it was studied carefully by 
Walsh and Riley, it was in conjunction with the largest of the 13-year 
broods, namely. Brood XIX. In 1885 it was in conjunction with tke 
second largest of the 13-year broods, namely. Brood XXIII. The 

a County names in italics are confirmations of old records, names in parentheses 
are old records unconfirmed, and starred names indicate occurrence in swarms. 

ft The old records for Virginia not confirmed specifically in 1901 are in the midst of 
counties with large swarms and were confirmed in a general report covering the south- 
western part of the State. 



year 1902 was not marked by the recurrence of any 13-year brood, 
and hence the records for that year, for the first time, could practi- 
cally all be assigned without question to Brood X. It had been 
anticipated by the writer and others that many of the records in 
middle and southern Illinois, for example, and northern Missouri, 
which had been referred to the two large 13-year broods, might pos- 
sibly belong to Brood X of the 17-year race. Rather to our surprise, 
however, the old limits of distribution for the three broods in question 
seem to be pretty definitely confirmed. 

Very thorough plans were made early in 1902 to have the entire 
territory over which the brood was expected fully and adequately 

Fig. 13.— Map showing distribution of Brood X, 1919. 

reported, and the responses received by this Bureau were numerous 
and satisfactory for practically the whole area covered by the brood. 
In addition to this several of the entomologists of the different States 
within the range of the brood carried on independent investigations, 
and the records obtained by them, most of which have been pub- 
lished since, have been incorporated with the reports received by this 
Bureau. All of the records agree in showing the substantial accuracy 
of the limits of this brood as hitherto platted. The State records 
available and used in the following list of States and counties, so far 
as they represent counties new to our records, are those reported by 
Pettit for Michigan, Smith for New Jersey, Sanderson for Delaware, 


Garman for Kentucky, Quaintance for Maryland, Felt for New York, 
and Hopkins for West Virginia. 

Leaving out the numerous scattering colonies the brood occupies 
three important regions: (1) An eastern region, covering Long Island, 
New Jersey, southeastern Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia and 
Virginia, and most of Delaware and Maryland; (2) a southern region, 
covering the Lower Alleghanies in northern Georgia, Tennessee, and 
North Carolina; and (3) a middle western region, covering western 
Ohio, southern Michigan, all of Indiana, except the lake shore 
(Webster), and the eastern line of Illinois. Many reports of scatter- 
ing occurrence or of chance individuals connect these three regions 
and also extend the range westward as far as the Missouri River 
(Iowa) and northward into New York and Vermont and possibly 
Massachusetts. But in the main the three regions designated include 
the abundant appearance of the brood in dense swarms. 

Where conditions had remained at all favorable |here was very 
little falling off in abundance of the Cicada at the time of its last 
appearance in 1902. In the District of Columbia, where the writer 
personally observed the insect, emergence began with the second week 
in May and was a fairly prolonged one, extending over three or four 
weeks." In this brood the small variety, cdssiniif is perhaps better 
represented than in any other, and this small variety appeared very 
generally in 1902, and in. great numbers. The deposition of eggs 
began about June 1 and continued with considerable activity until 
the middle of this month and was of suflScient amount to kill the 
terminal branches of trees, in some cases almost all the outer branches 

A big transplanting of eggs was made from the surrounding forests 
of the District to the grounds of the Department, where very few 
Cicadas had appeared, and all of them had been destroyed by birds 
before any egg laying had been done. This planting was made in the 
oak grove on the west side of the grounds, where similar experiments 
had formerly been in progress, so as to afford material for study of the 
development of the larvae. 

The records of distribution given below include all available data. 
The starred counties are those in which the Cicada appeared in 1902 
in one or more dense swarms. The italicized counties confirm older 
records, and the counties in parentheses are old records which failed 
of confirmation in 1902. This last does not necessarilv mean that the 
Cicada was absent from these counties, but simply the failure to 
receive reports of occurrence. A great many negative reports were 
received, and, as platted on a large study map, confirmed the accu- 
racy of the range of this brood as now given. 

oSee Proceedings Entomological Society, Washington, Vol. V, 1902, pp. 124-126. 


The distribution, by States and counties, follows: 

Alabama. — Cleburne, Jackson, Jefferson, Morgan, (St. Clair) (?). 

District op Columbia.* 

Delaware. — (Kent), Newcastle* Sussex.* 

Georgia. — Banks* Chattooga, Dade, Dawsoriy Fannin* Forsyth* (Franklin), Gil- 
mer* Gordon,* Greene, Habersham* Holly* Jackson,* Lincoln, Lumphin* Murray,* 
Newton,* Oglethorpe, Pickens* Rahun^* Union,* Walker, Walton, White* Whitfield, 

Illinois. — Alexander, Clark* Crawford* Cumberland, (Dewitt), Edgar* Edwards, 
(Gallatin), Hamilton, Hardin, (Iroquois), Jackson, (Kane), Lawrence, Logan, (Pope), 
Saline, Tazewell, Union, Vermilion,* Wahojsh, White,* Williamson. 

Indiana. — Adam^,* Allen, Bartholomew* Benton, Blackford,* Boone,* Brown* Car- 
roll* Cass,* Clark,* Clay,* Clinton,* Daviess,* Dearborn,* Decatur,* Dekalb,* Dela- 
ware,* Dubois,* Elkhart,* Fayette,* Floyd,* Fountain,* Franklin,* Fulton,* Gibson,* 
Grant,* Greene,* Hamilton,* Hancock,* Harrison,* Hendricks,* Henry,* Howard,* Hunt- 
ington,* Jackson,* Jay, Jefferson,* Jennings,* Johnson,* Knox,* Kosciusko,* Lake, 
Laporte,* Lawrence,* Madison,* ifanon,* Marshall,* Martin,* Miami,* Monroe,* Mont- 
gomery,* Morgan,* Noble,* Ohio,* Orange,* Owen,* Parke,* Perry,* Pike,* Porter,* 
Posey, Pulaski,* Putnam,* Randolph,* Ripley,* Rush,* St. Joseph,* Scott,* Shelby,* 
Spencer,* Starke,* Steuben,* Sullivan,* Switzerland,* Tippecanoe,* Tipton, Union,* 
Vanderburg,* Vermilion,* Vigo,* Warren,* Warrick,* Washington,* Wayne,* Wells,* 

Iowa. — ^Woodbury. 

Kentucky. — Allen, Anderson, Barren, Bath, Bell, Boone,* Boyd, Breckinridge,* 
Butler, Caldwell, Campbell,* Carroll,* Carter, Casey, Christian, Clay, Clinton, Crit- 
tenden, Cumberland, Daviess,* Edmonson, Fayette, Fleming, Franklin, Gallatin,* 
Garrard, Grant,* Grayson,* Green, Greenup, Hancock,* Hardin, Harrison,* (Hart), 
Henderson, Hickman, Hopkins, Jefferson,* Johnson, Kenton,* Knox, Larue, Laurel, 
Lawrence, Lee, Leslie, Letcher, Lewis, Lincoln, Livingston, ifcZ^an,* Madison, Magof- 
fin, Martin, Meade,* (Mercer), Monroe, Nelson, Nicholas, Ohio,* Oldham,* Owen,* 
Owsley, Pendleton,* Pike, Scott, Shelby,* Trigg, Trimble,* Union, Warren, Wash- 
ington, Wayne, Webster, Whitley, Wolfe. 

Maryland. — Allegany,* Anne Arundel,* Baltimore,* Calvert, Caroline, Carroll,* 
Cecil,* Frederick,* Garrett,* Harford,* Howard,* Kent,* Montgomery,* Prince George,* 
Queen Anne, Talbot,* Washington,* Wicomico. 

Massachusetts. — (Bristol) (?), Worcester(?). 

Michigan. — (Barry), Branch,* Calhoun,* Cass,* (Eaton), Genesee,* (Gratiot), Hills- 
dale, Ionia, (Jackson), Kalamazoo,* Lake, Lenawee, (Livingston), Missaukee, (Mon- 
roe), Muskegon, Newaygo, Oakland,* Saginaw, St. Clair, St. Joseph,* Van Buren, 
Washtenaw,* (Wayne). 

New Jersey. — Burlington,* Camden,* Cumberland,* Gloucester,* Hunterdon,* Mer- 
cer,* Middlesex,* Monmouth,* Morris,* Ocean, (Passaic), Salem,* Somerset,* Warren.* 

New York. — Columbia, Kings, (Monroe), Nassau, (Niagara), Ontario, Queens,* 
Richmond, Suffolk.* 

North Carolina. — Alexander, Alleghany, Burke,* (Caldwell) (?), Catawba, Chero- 
kee,* Davidson, Davie,* Lincoln, Stokes, Surry,* (Wake) (?), Wilkes* Yadkin.* 

Ohio. — (Adams), Allen,* Auglaize, Butler,* Champaign,* Clark,* (Clermont), Clin- 
ton, (Columbiana), Crawford,* Darke,* Delaware,* Fairfield,* Franklin,* Gallia, 
Greene,* Hamilton,* Hancock, Huron, Jackson,* Logan,* Lucas,* Madison,* Marion,* 
Mercer,* Miami,* Montgomery,* Morrow,* Pickaway,* (Pike), Preble,* Putnam,* (San- 
dusky), Seneca,* Shelby,* Union,* Van Wert, Warren,* Wyandot.* 

Pennsylvania. — Adams,* Bedfm-d,* Berks* Blair,* Bucks,* Carbon,* Chester,* Clin- 
ton, Columbia,* Cumberland,* Dauphin,* Delaware,* Franklin,* Fulton,* Hunting- 
dony * Juniata* Lackawanna,* Lancaster,* Lebanon,* Lehigh,* Luzerne,* Lycoming, 



Mercer, Mifflin* Monroe* Montgomery * Montour,* Northampton^* Perry* Philadel- 
phia* SchuylHll* Snyder* Somerset* Union* York* 

Tennessee. — Benton, Bledsoe, Blount* Bradley, Carroll, Carter^ Claiborne, Cum- 
berland, Dyer, Gibson, Grainger, Greene,* Hamblen* Hami/fon,* Hancock, Hawkins,* 
(Jame8(?)), Jefferson,* Johnson* Knox* Loudon* McMinn* Montgomery, Obion, 
Polk* Rhea, Roane, Robertson, (Scott), Sevier,* Smith,* (Sullivan), Washington* 
Weakley, White, Williamson. 

Vermont. — (Rutland.) 

Virginia. — Alexandria* Augusta, (Carroll) , Clarke* i^air/iu:,* Fauquier, Frederick* 
Grayson, Lee,* Loudoun* Orange, Prince William,* Roanoke, (Spotteylvania), 
Warren* Wise, Wythe. 

West Virginia. — ^Barbour, Berkeley* Boone, Cabell, Grant* Greenbrier, Hamp- 
shire* Hardy* Harrison,* Jefferson,* Lincoln, Logan, McDowell, Mason, Mineral* 
Mingo, Monroe, Morgan, Ohio, Pocahontas, Preston,* Putnam, Raleigh, Roane, 
Tucker,* Wayne. 

Wisconsin. — ^Dane, (Sauk). 

FiQ. 14.— Map showing distribution of Brood XI, 1920. 

Brood Xl— Septendedm— 1920. (Fig. 14.) 

This is a small brood limited, for the most part, to the valley of the 
Connecticut River in the States of Massachusetts and Connecticut, 
with one colony in the vicinity of Fall River separated from the main 
swarm. It is Brood I of Walsh-Riley and Brood 9 of Fitch, who 
reports it as having occurred in 1818 and 1835. It was recorded also 
by Dr. Gideon B. Smith from 1767 to 1852, and the genuineness of 
the brood was fully established in 1869. Like most small broods in 
settled regions, it is being greatly reduced in numbers, and in 1903 


Mr. Britten reports'* that he was not able to secure any records for 
Connecticut, although special effort was made to do so through 
correspondence. A personal examination of the area was, however, 
not made by the entomologist, and a clipping from the Hartford 
Courant of June 6 reports them present. 

In this year (1903), however, the first record of the periodical 
Cicada from Rhode Island was obtained, no brood having previously 
been reported from this State. The late James M. Southwick, 
curator of the Museum of Natural History, Roger Williams Park, 
reported under date of May 23 that a living specimen of the Cicada 
was brought to him that day taken near the southwest comer of 
Tiogue Reservoir, about a mile north of the New London turnpike, 
an unsettled region with plenty of woods. The specimen was secured 
by Mr. C. E. Ford, of Providence, who reported that the cicadas were 
making so much noise that he thought they must be frogs or toads 
having a late spring concert. Mr. Ford says, on the authority of his 
mother, that some were collected there thirty-four years before. This 
is a very interesting as well as unexpected record. 

The distribution bv States and counties is as follows: 

Connecticut. — Hartford. 

Massachusetts. — Bristol, Franklin, Hampshire. 

Rhode Island. — Providence. 

Brood XU—Septendeam— 1921. (Fig. 15.) 

The records on which this very doubtful new brood was based are 
given in Bulletin 18, new series, of this Bureau, pages 56, 57. The 
oldest record is that of Dr. Gideon B. Smith, who in his manuscript 
reports the Cicada as occurring in 1853 in Vinton County, Ohio, and 
Jo Daviess County, 111. Neither one of these localities was con- 
firmed, either in 1870, 1887, or 1904. In the latter year the writer 
made special effort to have records secured if possible, but without 
result. Professor 'Forbes particularly making inquiries for Jo Daviess 
County, 111. 

The other two records published in Bulletin 18 for this brood are 
as follows: 

Mr. J. R. Burke, Milton, Cabell County, W. Va., writing under date of May 22, 1897, 
says: "The Cicada is not due here until 1901; its l&st visit was in 1887." 

Mr. W. S. Herrick, Thurman, Allen County, Ind., writes under date of June 10, 1898, 
that "We had the 17-year locust in 1887, if I remember correctly." This is also a 
doubtful record, and it is possible that he referred either to Brood XXII, occurring in 
1885, or Brood V, occun-ing in 1888. 

No report whatever was received from Mr. Burke. Mr. Herrick, 
under date of September 1, 1904, reported that he vvent through the 
neighborhood where the locusts appeared in 1887, and failed to see 

a Report Conn. Exp. Sta. 1903, Part III, p. 214. 



any evidence of the occurrence of the brood. He states, however, 
that they were quite numerpus when they appeared before. The 
possibility here, however, is pretty strong that there is a mistake in 
the date. 

Some unimportant new records were obtained in 1904. Mr. S. D. 
Nixon found living cicadas, May 28, on a horse-chestnut tree in Mount 
Olivet Cemetery, Baltimore, Md. Mr. Robert A. Kemp reports that 
while collecting Lepidoptera in the woods at Catoctin Mountain, 
near Braddock, Md., his attention was arrested by the unmistakable 
cry of Tibicen septendedm. He was unable to secure the specimen, 
which was safely hidden in a dense grove of young chestnuts. He 

Fig. 15.— Map showing distribution of Brood XII, 1921. 

I was loath to leave him inasmuch as he gave me a parting "Pharaoh" when I left 
him alone in his glory. I have heard during the past week in this same woods several 
specimens, and have not yet given up hope of securing one. 

Both of these records may relate to belated specimens belonging to 
Brood X of 1902. Mr. C. H. Bobbit, of Baltimore, Md., reports 
that he heard twenty or thirty in a little piece of woods, and one 
captured specimen was seen by Doctor Howard. 

The records of this brood therefore are as follows, all very doubtful 
or unimportant : 

Illinois. — Jo Daviess County. 
Indiana. — Allen County. 



Maryland. — ^Frederick County and Baltimore. 

Ohio. — ^Vinton County. 

West Virginia. — Cabell (bunty. 

Brood XlU—Septendedm— 1922. (Fig. 16.) 

This very compact brood, described by Fitch as Brood No. 6, by 
Walsh-Riley as Brood III, and by Riley as Brood V, covers in large 
part a prairie or sparsely wooded region extending over portions of 
several States in the upper Mississippi Valley. 

A detached brood was formerly known in Pennsylvania, but seems 
not to have been seen in later years. A few individuals were reported 

Fio. 16.— Map showing distribution of Brood XIII, 1922. 

from two counties in Maryland in 1905, and two very doubtful records 
(1888) have been found for Kentucky and Virginia. Mr. Hopkins 
in his Bulletin 68 gives records indicating possible swarms in Putnam 
and Lincoln coimties, W. Va. None of these eastern records can have 
other than chance time relation with the main area covered by this 

As the periodical Cicada is limited to forested areas, the broods 
occurring in prairie districts of northern Illinois and adjoining States 
are necessarily much broken and scattered, and Brood XIII occurs, 
therefore, for the most part in small colonies in woods bordering 
streams. No special effort was made to get records in 1905, and this 


brood therefore rests practically on the data secured in earlier years. 
Reports came from eleven counties in Illinois — all, however, included 
in the region designated below — and from several of the counties in 
other States, where they were expected. The italicized counties are 
confirmations of old records. 

The distribution by States and coimties follows: 

Illinois. — All northern counties from Mercer southeast to Peoria, to Logan, Shelby, 
Edgar, including Lee^ Dekalb, Dupage, Kane, McLean, Rock Island, etc. 

Indiana. — Lake, Laporte, Porter. 

Iowa. — Allamakee, Benton^ Blackhawk, Bremer, Buchanan, Cedar, Chickasaw, 
Clayton, Clinton, Delaware, Dubuque, Fayette, Howard, Iowa, Jackson, Johnson, 
Jones, Linn, Louisa, Mitchell(?), Muscatine, Scott, Tama, Winne8hiek(?). 

Kentucky. — Lincoln. 

Maryland. — Baltimore, Frederick. 

Michigan. — ^Berrien, Branch, Cass, Hillsdale, Oaldand(?), St. Joseph, Wayne(?). 

Pennsylvania. — Lancaster. 

Virginia. — Lee. 

West Virginia. — Lincoln, Putnam. 

Wisconsin. — Crawford, Dane, Grant, Green, Iowa, Jefferson, Lafayette(?), Mil- 
waukee, Richland, Rock, Sauk, Walworth, Waukesha. 

Brood XlV—Sept€ndecim—192S. (Fig. 17.) 

This brood, so far as our records go, is the one which was first 
observed by the early European colonists on this continent. Two 
important areas occur in eastern Massachusetts, one about Plymouth 
and the other covering Cape Cod. The Plymouth swarm of 1634, 
the first after European settlement, was noted by the early Puritans 
and is referred to in the two earliest published notices of this curious 
insect. (See Bibliography.) One of these records gives the definite 
date of 1633, but, as shown by the subsequent appearances of the 
swarm, this date is probably an error for 1634. No published records 
have been found of the later appearances prior to 1789, but definite 
records have been made of each return since that year. An interest- 
ing account of the last appearance (1906) of the Cicada in Plymouth 
County is given in a report received from Martha W. Whitmore, 
Chiltonville, Plymouth, Mass. The near-by Barnstable colony was 
also most abundant last year (1906) all along Cape Cod. As reported 
by Miss Grace Avery, of Washington, D. C, the ground along the 
coast was covered with the dead bodies and the trees in the forests 
were all fired and brown from the egg-laying of the females. 

Prof. H. T. Femald reports (letter September 26, 1906) the dis- 
tribution in Plymouth and Barnstable counties as in the following 
towns: Plymouth, Wareham, Bourne, Falmouth, Sandwich, Mash- 
pee, Barnstable, Yarmouth, and Dennis, being most abxmdant in 
the three first named. 

This brood, like Brood VI, covers a very wide range, extending 
from Massachusetts westward to Illinois, with important groups of 



swarms extending from Pennsylvania southward into northern 
Virginia and in the Lower AUeghenies, covering portions of North 
Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, etc., and in the Ohio Valley region, 
covering especially southern Ohio, Indiana, central Kentucky, and 
western West Virginia. 

Brood XIV has been carefully studied, notably so on the occasion 
of its appearance in 1906, when a great many new records were 
obtained by this Bureau and by the entomologists of the several 
States included within its range. 

Important new records were secured and kindly submitted to this 

Fig. 17.— Map showing distribution of Brood XIV, 1923. 

oflSce by Messrs. Garman, Fernald, Felt, Sherman, Howser, Bentley, 
and Ramsay, for, respectively, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, 
North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia. 

The occurrence jointly with this brood in 1906 of the small and 
rather unimportant 13-year Brood XVIII leaves some doubt as to 
the correct assignment of certain swarms in southern Illinois, western 
Kentucky, and Tennessee. 

The starred counties indicate the occurrence of the Cicada in one 
or more characteristic dense swarms; the italicized counties are con- 
firmations of old records, and the counties inclosed in parentheses are 
old records not reported in 1898. The large dots on the map (fig. 17) 


indicate the starred counties and the small dots the unimportant or 
doubtful occurrences. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

District of Columbia. — Throughout. 

Georgia. — (Gordon), (Habersham), (Rabun), (Towns), (Union), (White). ^ 

Illinois. — (Boone), Grundy(?), Jo Daviess^ JohnsonC?), (Lake), (McHenry) 
(McLean), (Putnam), (Stephenson), Vermilion, Whiteside,* (Winnebago), Wood- 

Indiana. — Boone(?), Brown,* Carroll(?), (Clark), (Clay), (Crawford), (Daviess), 
Dearborn, Duboi8(?), Floyd, Fountain, (Gibson), Grant, (Greene), Harrison, Jack- 
Bon(?), Johnson, Knox, (Lake), (Lawrence), Monroe, Moiigan, Orange, Perry,* (Pike), 
(Posey), Putnam, Ripley, Scott, Steuben(?), Sullivan, Tippecanoe, (Vanderbuig), 
(Vigo), Warrick, W^ashington, Wayne. 

Kentucky. — Adair,* Allen,* Anderson,* Barren, BaJth, (Bourbon), Boyd* Boyle,* 
(Breckinridge), Bullitt,* (Carter), Casey,* (Clark), (Clinton), CitmiertorMf,* Edmon- 
son,* Estill,* (Fayette), (Fleming), Floyd,* (Franklin), Garrard,* Grayson,* Green, 
(Greenup), Hancock(?), Hardin,* Harrison, Hart, Henry, (Jackson), (Jefferson), 
Jessamine,* Johnson,* Knott,* Knox,* Larue,* Lawrd, Lawrence,* Lee,* (Lewis), 
Lincoln,* Logan,* (McLean), (Madison), Magoffin,* Martin, Mason, Meade, Menifee, 
Mercer, (Metcalfe), Monroe,* (Montgomery), Nelson,* Nicholas,* Owen, Owsley ,* 
Pendleton,* Perry, Pike,* (Powell), Pulashi,* Rockcastle,* Rowan,* (Russell), Scott,* 
Shelby,* Simpson, Taylor,* Trimble,* Warren,* Wayne,* Whitley, Wolfe. 

Maryland. — ^Allegany,* Frederick,* Howard, Montgomery, Prince Geoige, Wash- 

Massachusetts. — Barnstable,* Plymouth* 

New Jersey. — Bergen, (Burlington), (Cape May), (Gloucester), (Mercer). 

New York.— On Long Island* and in Richmond County. 

North Carolina. — Buncombe,* Caldwell,* Caswell,* Haywood,* Jackson, McDow- 
ell,* Madison,* Mitchell,* Watauga,* Wilkes,* Yancey.* 

Ohio. — Adaryis,* Auglaize, Brown,^ Butler,* Clermont,* Clinton* Columbiana, 
Cuyahoga, Delaware, Fayette,* Gallia,* Greene,* Hamilton,* Highland,* Jackson, Law- 
rence,* (Meigs), Pike,* Preble, Ross,* Scioto,* Vinton,* Warren,* Washington. 

Pennsylvania. — (Adams), Bedford,* Berks, Blair,* (Center), (Chester), Clearfield,* 
Clinton,* (Columbia), Cumberland, Franklin,* (Huntingdon), (Lancaster), Lehigh, 
Luzerne,* (Lycoming), (Mifflin), Montour,* Northumberland,* Potter, Snyder,* 
Schuylkill,* Tioga, Union,* York. 

Tennessee. — ^Anderson, Bledsoe,* Blount,* Campbell, Cannon,* Carter,* Cheat- 
ham,* Claiborne,* Clay, Cocke,* Coffee,* Cumberland,* Dekalb,* Fentress,* Frank- 
lin,* Grainger,* Greene,* Grundy,* Hancock,* Hawkins,* Johnson,* Macon,* Marion,* 
Morgan,* Overton,* Pickett,* Putnam,* Rhea,* Roane, Robertson,* Scott,* Stewart, 
Sullivan,* Unicoi,* Union, Warren,* White.* 

Virginia. — (Alexandria), Augusta,* Buchanan,* Dickenson,* Fairfax, Frederick,* 
Lee,* Nelson, Tazewell,* Wise.* 

West Virginia. — Berkeley,* Boone,* Brooke, Cabell,* Doddridge, Fayette,* 
Greenbrier, Hampshire,* Hancock, Hardy, Jackson, Jefferson, Kanawha* Lincoln,* 
Logan,* McDowell,* Mason,* Mercer,* Mineral,* Mingo,* Monroe, Morgan,* Pendle- 
ton, Pocahontas, Preston, Putnam,* Raleigh,* Ritchie, Roane, Wayne,* Webster, 
Wood,* Wyoming.* 

- Brood XY—Septendecim~1907. (Fig. 18.) 

This is one of the new 17-year broods indicated by the writer in 
Bulletin 18 (new series) of this Bureau, and consists of retarded 
eastern colonies of Brood XIV. The important colonies of this brood 



are in Dutchess and Saratoga counties, N. Y. All the records from 
Bttfletin 18 are reproduced below, with the exception of the report 
from Indian Territory, which falls distinctly within the 13-year lines, 
aifff Tias been transferred to Brood XXIX. 

This brood is represented by the colony appearing at Tivoli, 
Dutchess County, and Galway, Saratoga County, N. Y., in June, 
1890, as recorded by Prof. J. A. Lintner in his Seventh Report, 
pages 297-301. Mr. Davis records the occurrence of scattering 
individuals the dame year on Staten Island. In a letter of June 2, 
1890, Prof. J. B. Smith, New Brunswick, N. J., reports that the 

Fig. 18.— Map showing distribution of Brood XV, 1907. 

periodical Cicada had been taken by several Newark (Essex County) , 
collectors, and had also been observed at Anglesea, Cape May 

Another record which perhaps applies to this brood is given by 
Mr. I. N. Smith, Scotland Neck, Halifax County, N. C, in letter of 
June 22, 1885. He reports that his *' first recollection of the locust 
was about the year 1839 or 1840, when the whole of the white-oak 
lands were filled with them. * * * In 1855 or 1856 they appeared 
again, but nothing to compare with the period first stated. The 
locusts were all on the white-oak land and on the Roanoke River and 
not on the pine lands.'' Assuming the dates 1839 and 1856 to be the 
correct ones, this would throw this swarm of Cicadas into Brood XV. 



and if there are any representatives left they should reappear in 1907. 
The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

New Jersey. — Cape May, Essex. 

New York. — Dutchess, Richmond, Saratoga. 

North Carolina. — Halifax. 

Brood XVJ—Septendecim—190S. (Fig. 19.) 

This old Brood IX of Riley (VII of Walsh-Riley) is a very small 
and doubtful one, and represents a few isolated colonies in the 
extreme western portion of the range of the species, possibly two 
years belated swarms of Brood XIV. It was reported as occur- 

FlG. 19.— Map showing distribution of Brood XVI, 1908. 

ring in 1857 in southeastern Nebraska, and a very definite record 
for Franklin County, Ark., which apparently pertains to this brood, 
was obtained in 1885. Mr. J. M. Pettigrew, writing under date of 
July 1, states that the cicadas were numerous in that county in May, 
1857, and in 1874, doing some injury to small branches of fruit trees, 
especially apple. This record falls in the western central part of the 
State, and is surrounded by 13-year records, but is at an elevation 
of a thousand feet or more and, in view of the definiteness of the 
report, does not seem to be open to doubt. There is a doubtful 
record reporting the Cicada in Lee County, Iowa, in 1874, which 
seems to belong to this brood. 



In Bulletin 14 and older publications a western outpost in Boulder 
County, Colo,, was reported for this brood. This record is undoubt- 
edly erroneous, and arises from the confusion of one or other of the 
mountain species of Cicada which also have life cycles of several 
years and duplicate somewhat the habits of the eastern species. 
Prof. C. P. Gillette, in answer to an inquiry by the writer, states 
that he does not believe that septendecim occurs in Colorado, inasmuch 
as he has not found a single example of it in the course of the insect 
collectinjg done there by himself and students during the last sixteen 
years, and he suspects that the insect reported is TiMcen rimosa Say, 
which might readily have been mistaken for septendecim. 

Fio. 20.— Map showing distribution of Brood XVII, 1909. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

Arkansas. — Franklin. 
Iowa. — Lee (?). 
Nebraska. — Richardson. 

Brood XVIl— Septendecim— 1909. (Fig. 20.) 

This brood is a precursor of Brood I, and was indicated by the 
writer in Bulletin 18 (new series) of this Bureau. It comprises 
small or doubtful colonies only. The records given in that publica- 
tion are reproduced below without change except for the addition of 
two new localities for Virginia, one in Appomattox County and 
the other in the southwestern part of Washington County. 


A very definite record which may coincide with this brood is 
furnished by Mr. Theodore Pergande, of this Bureau, who states that 
Mr. Rosseau, of Charlottesville, Albemarle Coimty, Va., informed 
him that the Cicada was very numerous in that place in 1875. His 
informant was positive as to the year from its being the one in which 
he made a trip to Europe. 

Another record is given by Mr. John D. Macpherson, Manassas, 
Prince William County, Va., in letter of July 3, 1895. He writes: 

I came here on the 23d of June, leaving the Cicada in full song in Washington 
(Brood X). Finding none here I made inquiry and was informed that they appeared 
in full force in this county (Prince William) in the year 1875. This information I 
regard as reliable, the date being fixed as the year following the marriage and arrival 
of my informant in this county. 

Mr. J. R. Honley, of Spanish Oaks, in a report received in 1898, 
states that the '^ locusts '' appeared in Appomattox County in 1892, and 
Mr. A. M. Connell, in a postal of May 29, 1902, reports their appear- 
ance in the southwestern part of Washington County in 1841, 1858, 
1875, and 1892. These Virginia swarms are evidently precursors 
of Brood I, with which they are therefore closely allied. 

A western extension of this brood seems to be indicated in the 
record furnished by H. J. Giddings, Sabula, Jackson County, Iowa. 
He writes, *' during last June (1892) the periodical Cicada was quite 
common here. * * * i thought it was unusual to find them in 
such numbers four years after their regular appearance. The last 
regular year was 1883. *' (See Insect Life, Vol. V, p. 200.) 

If belonging to the 17-year race, the two records following should 
also be assigned to this brood. Mr. A. J. Julian, Woolleys Ford, 
Hall County, Ga., reports under date of June 14, 1898, that the 
Cicada was present there in 1892. Mr. J. W. Seaton, Strasburg, 
Cass County, Mo., writes under date of June 9 that the Cicada last 
appeared in that county in the summer of 1892 and in the sununer 
of 1896, being numerous both years. The 1896 record refers to the 
17-year Brood IV, and hence the record of 1892 is probably also of 
the 17-year race occurring in the same district. 

The scattering specimens recorded by Mr. Davis as occurring on 
Staten Island in 1892 may also be assigned to this brood. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is therefore as follows: 

Georgia. — Hall. 

Iowa. — Jackson. 

Missouri. — Cass. 

New York. — Richmond. 

Virginia. — Albemarle, Appomattox, Prince William, Washington. 


Broods of the Thirteen- Year Race. 


Brood XVIII— TVcckam— 1919. (Fig. 21.) 

This is an unimportant brood, most of the records representmg 
scattering specimens rather than dense swarms. It was originally 
established by Professor Riley as Brood XVI on the testimony 
of Dr. G. B. Smith, who gives in his Register a record of its appear- 
ance in Cherokee Coimty, Ga, in 1828, 1841, and 1854. Its appear- 
ance in the same locality was also recorded by Dr. J. G. Morris 
in 1867, and this seems to be the most important swarm of the brood. 
The records obtained since relate to scattering occurrences in three 
other States. 

Fig. 21.— Map showing distribution of Brood XVIII, 1919. 

This brood immediately precedes in time of appearance the largest 
13-year brood known, namely. Brood XIX. The latter brood occu- 
pies the Mississippi Valley in the main, but with scattering swarms 
extending well over the Southern States and into Virginia, and thus 
overlaps the territory covered by Brood XVIII, mdicating very 
plainly the origin of the latter as accelerated swarms of Brood XIX. 

The locaUties for Brood XVIII as listed in Bulletin 14, are those 
given by Professor Riley in 1894.« None of them was verified in 

a Annual Report, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1893, p. 204. (The records on 
which localities for this brood are based are given in an editorial note in Vol. V, Insect 
Life, pp. 298, 299.) 

31117— No. 71—07 5 



1893, but an additional and very doubtful locality (Montgomery, Ala ) 
was reported that year. The records obtained in 1906 added three 
counties for Georgia, six for Tennessee, one for North Carolina, and 
one for South Carolina, but gave again no confirmations of old 
records. The lack of confirmations, however, does not invalidate 
these old records nor necessarily mean the dying out of the swarms, 
as no particular effort was made to get reports from the exact 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

Alabama. — (Lowndes), (Montgomery) (?). 

Georgia. — (Cherokee), (Cobb), Gordon, Oglethorpe, Screven. 

Fig. 22.— Map showing distribution of Brood XIX, 1907. 

North Carolina. — Anson, (Lincoln), (Moore). 

South Carolina. — Edgefield.* 

Tennessee. — Carroll, Dyer, Lauderdale, (Lincoln), McNairy, Madison, Stewart. 

Brood XIX— Trededm— 1907. (Fig. 22.) 

This is the largest of the 13-year broods, and also the best recorded, 
perhaps, from the standpoint of distribution of all the broods. It is 
Fitch's Brood No. 3, in part, XIII of Walsh-Riley, and XVIII of 
Riley. Its existence has been known since 1803. Its limits were 
most carefully studied by Walsh and Riley in 1868, particularly for 
the Missouri and Illinois localities. As has elsewhere been explained 
(p. 31)_, there is a possibility that some of the northern counties, at 


least of niinois and Missouri, listed for this brood belong to the 
17-year Brood X, which appeared with Brood XIX in the year men- 
tioned. Some additional data were obtained in 1881 and published 
in Bulletin No. 8, old series, of the Division of Entomology, and the 
records were brought down to 1894 in the circular issued by Pro- 
fessor Riley in that year. The later records, mostly in reply to the 
circular just mentioned, but including a good many reports received 
subsequent to the publication of Bulletin 14, considerably modify 
and extend the range of the brood. The record for El Paso, Tex., 
is open to much doubt. The relationship of this brood to Brood 
XXII has been elsewhere discussed. 
Its reported limits are as follows : 

Alabama. — Autauga, Blount, Bullock, Cherokee, Colbert, Cullman, Dallas Dekalb, 
Elmore, Etowah, Franklin, Hale, Jackson, Jefferson, Lamar, Lauderdale, Lowndes, 
Macon, Marshall, Mobile, Montgomery, Perry, Randolph, Russell, St. Clair. 

Arkansas. — Baxter, Benton, Boone, Carroll, Clark, Clay, Conway, Crawford, 
Dallas, Drew, Franklin, "Fulton, Garland, Grant, Greene, Hempstead, Hot Spring, 
Izard, Johnson, Lawrence, Logan, Lonoke, Madison, Marion, Newton, Prairie, Pulaski, 
Randolph, Scott, Searcy, Sebastian, Sharp, Stone, Van Buren, Washington, White. 

Georgia. — Campbell, Catoosa, Chattooga, Cherokee, Floyd, Fulton, Harris, Pike, 
Polk, Rabun, Richmond, Walker, White. 

Illinois. — Adams, Bond, Cass, Champaign, Christian, Clark, Clay, Clinton, Coles^ 
Crawford, Cumberland, Douglas, Edgar, Edwards, Effingham, Franklin, Gallatin, 
Greene, Hamilton, Hancock, Hardin, Iroquois, Jasper, Jefferson, Jersey, Johnson, 
Lawrence, Livingston, McLean, Macon, Macoupin, Madison, Marion, Massac, Monroe, 
Montgomery, Morgan, Perry, Piatt, Pike, Pope, Randolph, Richland, St. Clair, Saline, 
Sangamon, Scott, Shelby, Union, Vermilion, Wabash, Washington, Wayne, White, 

Indian Territory. — Choctaw, Creek. 

Indiana . — Vanderburg. 

Iowa. — Lee. 

Kentucky. — Carlisle, Graves, Hopkins, McCracken, Marshall, Trigg. 

Louisiana. — Bossier, Caddo, Claiborne, Morehouse, Washington. 

Mississippi. — Attala, Choctaw, Clarke, Copiah, Franklin, Jasper, Lauderdale, 
Leake, Madison, Monroe, Oktibbeha, Scott. 

Missouri. — Audrain, Barry, Barton, Benton, Bollinger, Boone, Butler, Callaway, 
Cedar, Chariton, Clark, Cole, Cooper, Dade, Dallas, Douglas, Franklin, Gasconade, 
Greene, Henry, Howard, Iron, Jasper, Jefferson, Knox, Laclede, Lawrence, Lewis, 
Linn, Livingston, McDonald, Macon, Madison, Marion, Moniteau, Monroe, Morgan, 
Newton, Oregon, Pettis, Phelps, Pike, Polk, Pulaski, Ralls, Randolph, Ripley, 
St. Charles, St. Clair, St. Francois, St. Louis, Saline, Schuyler, Shannon, Stoddard, 
Stone, Warren, Washington, Webster, Wright. 

North Carolina. — Cabarrus, Caldwell, Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood, Iredell, 
Macon, Madison, Mecklenburg, Swain, Wake, Wilkes. 

Oklahoma Territory. — Payne. 

South Carolina. — Aiken, Anderson, Chester, Greenville, Laurens, Oconee, Orange- 
burg, Pickens, Spartanburg, Union, York. 

Tennessee. — ^Bedford, Blount, Cocke, Davidson, Gibson, Giles, Greene, Hamblen, 
Hamilton,. Jefferson, Knox, Lawrence, Loudon, McMinn, Marion, Monroe, Mont- 
gomery, Rutherford, Sevier, Stewart, Wayne, Williamson, Wilson. 

Texas.— El Paso (?). 

Virginia. — ^Brunswick, Halifax, Hanover, Prince George. 



Brood XX— TVedecim— 1908. (Fig. 23.) 

This is a small brood, founded on records given by Doctor Smith. 
Some of the localities cited were confirmed and others negatived on 
the recurrence of the brood in 1869, as reported by Professor Riley in 
Bulletin No. 8, old series, of the Division of Entomology. Since that 
date three doubtful localities have been added, one each for Virginia, 
North Carolina, and Georgia, possibly based on 17-year broods which 
appeared in conjunction with this brood. 

Fig. 23.— Map showing distribution of Brood XX, 1908. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

Georgia. — Banks, Greene, Jasper, Muscogee, Walker, Washington. 
North Carolina — Wilkes (?). 
Virginia. — ^Wise (?). 

Brood XXI— Tredecim— 1909. (Fig. 24.) 

This is one of the broods representing the extreme southern range of 
the Cicada, and was recorded by Doctor Smith in Florida as occurring 
in 1844 and 1857. Its existence was confirmed in 1870, when records 
were obtained indicating its extension also into Alabama, Mississippi, 
and Tennessee. 

It is a brood which, according to report, does not seem to occur in 
dense swarms, but scatteringly, at least in its more northern range. 

BROOD XXII — TBEOECnc — 1910. 


No records of its appearance which have come to our notice were made 
in 1883 nor in 1896. 

The distribution, by States and counties, is as follows: 

Alabama. — Lauderdale, Mobile. 
Florida. — Gadsden, Jackson, Washington. 
Mississippi. — ^Jackson, Tishomingo. 
Tennessee. — ^Hardin. 

Fig. 24.— Map showing distribution of Brood XXI, 1909. 
Brood XXII— TVedmm— 1910. (Fig. 25.) 

This 13-year brood, which appeared last in 1897, is of small extent, 
but well established by many reliable records, the oldest of which dates 
back to 1806. It is Brood IV of Walsh-Riley and VI of Riley. 

A summary of the distribution of this brood was given by Mr. 
Schwarz in Circular No. 22 of the Division of Entomology, issued in 
May, 1897. This inquiry resulted in the report of but one additional 
locality. The distribution and relationship of this brood is given by 
Mr. vSchwarz in the circular referred to, as follows: 

It is confined to parts of southern Mississippi and adjacent parts of Louisiana east of 
the Mississippi, the particular localities being given further on. Dr. D. L. Phares, of 
Woodville, Miss., has taken particular pains to ascertain the extent of this brood, and 
his lucid and concise account, already published in 1885, in Bulletin 8 (old series) of 
this Division, is herewith reproduced: 

"Their western limit is the Mississippi River, the southern about 8 miles north of 
Baton Rouge, the eastern about 4 miles west of Greensburg, the county seat of Helena, 



and 4 miles west also of Liberty, in Amite County, Miss., thus extending from 15 to 50 
miles from the Mississippi River, and from the vicinity of Baton Rouge, 108 miles to 
the northern limit of Claiborne C'ounty, Miss., perhaps even farther. They therefore 
occupy East and West Feliciana, the northern part of East Baton Rouge, the northwest 
comer of Livingston and the western part of St. Helena parishes. La., and Wilkinson, 
Adams, Jefferson, Claiborne, and parts of Amite, Franklin, and possibly parts of one or 
two more counties in Mississippi." 

The reports received since 1885 are mostly confirmatory of Doctor Phares^s state- 
ment, but Mr. Thomas F. Anderson, of St. Helena, La., writes us that the parishes, or at 
least parts of the parishes, of Tangipahoa, Washington, and St. Tammany had to be 
added to the range of this brood. His statement is quite definite; still a confirmation 
of these new localities is desirable. 

Brood VI [XXII] is evidently a forerunner of the very large 13-year Brood VII 
[XXIII], which will appear in 1898 in the Mississippi Valley. The geographical 

Fig. 25.— Map showing distribution of Brood XXII, 1910. 

range of Brood VII [XXIII] was mapped out in the Annual Report of this Depart- 
ment for 1885, and it will be seen from this map that the southern limits of Brood 
VII [XXIII] almost precisely coincide with the northern limits of our Brood VI 

One new locality in central Louisiana, in Catahoula County, hks been 

The brood occurs in the following States and counties : 

Louisiana. — Parishes of East Baton Rouge, Catahoula, East Feliciana, Livingston, 
St. Helena, St. Tammany (?), Tangipahoa (?), Washington (?), and West Feliciana. 

Mississippi. — Counties of Adams, Amite, Claiborne, Franklin, Jefferson, and Wil- 


Brood XXIII -Tredecim- 1911. (Fig. 26.) 


This is Brood No. 5 of Fitch, Brood V also of Walsh-Riley, and 
Brood VII of Riley. There are two large 13-year broods, which 
honor Brood XXIII divides with Brood XIX. As indicated by Mr. 
Schwarz in Circular No. 30, both of these broods occupy the Missis- 
sippi Valley from northern Missouri and southern Illinois to Louisiana ; 
but while Brood XIX occurs also in many other localities, Brood 
XXIII is confined more strictly to the Mississippi Valley region. At 
the time of the recurrence of this brood in 1898 a very careful investi- 
gation was undertaken by the writer of its distribution. 

Several thousand, replies were received in response to a circular 

Fig. 26.— Map showing distribution of Brood XXIII, 1911. 

sent out, many of which were negative, the investigation being 
extended throughout all States in which there was any likelihood of 
the appearance of the Cicada, and necessarily covering many counties 
and districts where the Cicada was not suspected. Local investiga- 
tions were also undertaken by the official entomologists in several 
States, Professor Forbes adding four or five new counties for Illinois, 
Professor Garman adding six counties for Kentucky not previously 
reported, all in the eastern end of the State, and Professor Stedman 
adding one new county from Missouri. In all three of these reports 
our own records were confirmed for nearly every county. The 
results of this canvass up to June 20 were recorded in Bulletin No. 14 


(new series), Division of Entomology, in an appendix. A large 
number of replies were received subse(j[uent to that date, and the full 
report, with corrected list of localities, was published in Bulletin 18 
(new series), pages 61-63. The State and county records given 
below are reproduced from this final report. 

Tlie reports for 1898 nearly all indicate the occurrence of the insect 
in enormous numbers. ITnfortunately, however, there enters again 
with the records of this year some doubt as to the correct reference of 
some of the localities in Illinois, Indiana, and perhaps northern Mis- 
souri, or, in other words, where the territory occupied by the two 
races overlaps on account of the scattering presence of Brood VI. In 
most of the records assigned to Brood XXIII, however, in the States 
mentioned, the evidence points pretty strongly to the accuracy of the 
reference. Where there is uncertainty a query follows the county. 

The counties marked with a star (*) indicate those in which the 
Cicada occurred in one or more dense swarms, in many cases several 
reports being received from the same county. In the unstarred 
counties the Cicada was reported in few or scattering numbers, or at 
least as not abundant. The counties in italics duplicate old records; 
the counties lacking confirmation by the records of this year are 
inclosed in parentheses and incorporated with the others. 

The State and county records follow: 

Alabama. — Etowah. 

Arkansas. — ArhansaSj* Ashley, Calhoun, Carroll, Chicot^* Clark,* Columbia^ Craig- 
head,* Crawford, Crittenden,* Cross* Desha* (Franklin), Fulton, Garland, Hot 
Spring, Howard, (Izard), (Jackson), Jefferson* Lafayette,* Lee,* Lincoln, Logan, 
Lonoke,* Marion^ Mississippi,* Monroe,* Newton, Phillips* Pike, Poinsett,* Prairie^* 
Pulaski, Randolph, St. Francis,* Saline,* (Searcy), Sebastian, Sharp, Union, Van 
Buren, Washington, Woodruff.* 

Georgia. — (Cobb, Coweta, Dekalb, Gwinnett, Meriwether, Newton. «) 

Illinois. — Alexander * Crawford,* Edgar, Edwards,* Gallatin, Hardin,* Jackson* 
Jasper,* Jefferson, Johnson, Lawrence,* Macoupin, Madison,* Marion,* Perry,* Pike, 
Pulaski,* Randolph, Richland, St. Clair, Scott, Union,* Wabash,* Washington, Wayne,* 
White, Williamson.* 

Indiana. — Bartholomew, Daviess,* Fayette, Floyd, Gibson,* Jackson, Jennings, 
Knox,* Montgomery, Owen, Posey,* Putnam, Ripley, Spencer, Sullivan,* Vander- 
burg,* Vigo,* Warrick.* 

Kentucky. — Ballard,* (Barren?), Butler, Caldwell, Calloway, Carlisle,* Christian, 
Clinton, Crittenden, Daviess, Fulton,* Grant, Graves,* Green, Hancock, Hajdin, 
Hickman,* Hopkins, Livingston, Lyon, McCracken, McLean, Marshall, Muhlenberg, 
Ohio, Todd, Trigg,* Union, Webster, Wolfe.* 

Louisiana. — Bienville,* (Bossier), Caldwell,* Claiborne, Concordia,* Ecust Carroll* 
East Feliciana, Franklin,* Madison,* Morehouse, Ouachita,* Pointe Coupee,* (Red 
River), Richland,* St. Helena, Tangipahoa, Tensas,* (Washington), West Carroll* 

Mississippi. — Adams, Alcorn,* Amite,* Attala,* Benton,* Bolivar,* Calhoun,* 
Carroll,* Claiborne, Coahoma,* Copiah,* De Soto,* Franklin, Grenada,* Hinds,* 
Holmes,* (Issaquena), Itawamba, (Jasper), Jefferson, Lafayette,* Lawrence, Leake, 

^ N()n(i of these localities, all of which were queried, was confirmed in 1898, and the 
record of this brood in Georgia is imdoubtedly erroneous. 

BBOOD XXIV — TBEDEOnr — 1012. 


Lee,* Leflore,* Lincoln* Lowndes, Madison* Marion, Marshall^* Montgomeryf* 
Neshoba, Newton, Oktibbeha,* Panola* Pike,* Pontotoc,* Prentiss,* QuitTnan* ^ 
RanHn* (Scott), Simpson^ Smithy Tallahatchie,* Tate* Tippah, (Tishomingo), 
Tunica,* Union,* Warren,* Washington,* Webster* Yalobusha,* Yazoo.* 

Missouri. — AiuJrain* Barry, Benton, Boone, Callaway, Camden, Cape Girardeau,* 
Cedar, Christian, Clark (?), Clinton, Cole, Cooper, Dade, Dallas, Dent, Douglas, Gas- 
conade, Greene, Hickory, Howell, Iron, Jefferson, Johnson, Knox, (Lawrence), Linn, 
Maries,* Miller, Morgan, New Madrid,* Osage,* Ozark, Pemiscot,* Perry,* Pettis, 
Phelps, Polk, Pulaski, Reynolds (?), St. Charles,* St. Clair, St. Francois, St, Louis^ 
Scott,* Taney, Texas, Warren, Washington,* Webster. 

Ohio. — Hamilton. 

Tennessee. — Benton,* Carroll,* Chester,* Crockett, (Davidson), Decatur,* Dickson,* 
Dyer,* Fayette,* Gibson,* Hardeman,* Hardin,* Haywood, Henderson,* Henry,* Hum^ 
phreys,* Lake,* Lauderdale,* Lewis, McNairy,* Madison,* (Maury), Montgomery, 
Obion,* Perry,* (Robertson), Rutherford, Shelby,* Stewart, Tipton,* Wayne,* Weak- 
ley,* Williamson. 

FiQ. 27.— Map showing distribution of Brood XXIV, 1912. 
Brood XXIY—Tredecim— 1912. (Fig. 27.) 

This is one of the new tredecim broods indicated by the writer in 
Bulletin 18 (new series) of this Bureau on the strength of the following 

Mr. P. Lynch, Commerce, Scott County, Mo., imder date of Decem- 
ber 24, 1874, reports that the Cicada appeared in the summer of 1873 
in considerable numbers, coming in June and remaining about two 
months. "Their eastern limit in this county (Scott) was the Missis- 


sippi River, but they were as numerous on the opposite side of the 
river in Alexander Countv, 111.'' 

Mr. W. S. Campere, Pickens Station, Holmes County, Miss., writes 
under date of February 27, 1875, that the cicadas appeared in great 
numbers in April, 1873. These two records would indicate a brood 
originating doubtless by retardation of individuals of Brood XXIII. 

Subsequent to the publication of the records for this brood in Bul- 
letin No. 18 (new series) of this Bureau two additional localities have 
been reported — one in Louisiana and one in Mississippi. Mr. Ben H 
Brodnax, of Brodnax, Morehouse County, La., reported in 1899 that 
the locusts first appeared in small numbers on May 2 and lasted only 
about ten days. On inquiry he found that they were heard scattered 
about the south Arkansas line (Ashley County) and down to the 
lower line of Morehouse Parish. No specimens were collected. This 
report carries the record of this brood into the edge of Arkansas. 

Mr. George H. Kent, Meadville, Franklin County, Miss., in a letter 
of May 30, 1899, reports the appearance of a small brood in the western 
part of Franklin County between the latter part of April and May 15. 
Both of these records, as with the earlier ones, are probably from 
belated swarms of Brood XXIII, but may represent the start of a 
new brood. 

The State and county distribution of the brood is ag follows: 

Arkansas. — Ashley. 
Illinois. — Alexander. 
Louisiana. — ^Morehouse. 
Mississippi. — Franklin, Holmep. 
Missouri. — Scott. 

Brood XXV— Trer/mm— 1913. 

(No Cicada records of the 13-year race have been reported corre- 
sponding with this brood number.) 

Brood XXYI—Trededm—ldU. (Fig. 28.) 

This brood. No. X of Riley, was originally based on a very doubtful 
record given by Dr. Gideon B. Smith, to the effect that he was 
informed that the insect appeared in vast numbers in parts of Texas 
in 1849, but that he was unable to get any particulars. No confirma- 
tion of the occurrence of this brood m Texas has since been gained, 
and its existence is very doubtful. A more definite record was 
secured, however, by Professor Riley in 1875, from Dr. D. L. Phares. 
A gentleman reported to the latter that a swarm of cicadas was heard 
on the 10th of June in West Feliciana Parish, La., near the river and 
south of Bayou Sara. Some specimens were secured of this brood, 
all dwarfs. No other record seems to have been secured of this brood 
until the year 1901. In that year the occurrence of the brood in West 
Feliciana Parish was confirmed, locusts being reported by Mr. John 



F. GrifBn, of Wakefield, as occurrinj^r in small numbers throughout the 
parish between the 5th and 25th of May. An outpost in Mississippi 
is also reported by Mr. George II. Kent, Suffolk, Franklin County, 
who reports their appearance throughout the southwestern portion 
of the county in the 'month of May. 

The records for this brood, therefore, are: 

Louisiana. — ^West Feliciana Parish. 
Mississippi. — Franklin County. 
Texas.— (?). 

Fig. 28.— Map showing cRstribution of Brood XXVI, 1914. 
Brood XXVII— 7Ve(/mm— 1915. 

A small brood was reported for Franklin County, Miss., as appearing 
about May 20, 1902, by Mr. George H. Kent, of Suffolk. 

Brood XXVIII— rm/mm—1916. 

(No Cicada records of the 13-year race have been reported corre- 
sponding with this brood number.) 

Brood XXIX— Trededm— 1917. (Fig. 29.) 

Two records which can be assigned to this brood number were 
reported by the writer in Bulletin 18 (new series) of this Bureau. 

Mr. C. J. Wellborn, Blairsville, Union County, Ga., writes under 
date of June 12, 1885, that ^^in May, 1878, locusts appeared south 

^jW;4^ltainftttlwre!aV««VA9 the present southern 

jW*Wf^5|£tMi|li>ilimty, S. C, writes that 
lilHIII8lilfi?iltt liRl<MS juit does not give delmite 

ibertson, of Muskogee, 
of a brood 

l,l!ar«iS>,Qa viSfGOTi in the publication just 

K ■J'^^fflk'^Stli^S^'^'*''^'^ ^ ^ '* probably 
g^'sl9^?k*^}3|«kaitlHlls, however, in territoiy 

!*id counties, is as follows: 

5gI>^i|§i4^§'on a single record given 
'^-^^^=-^]^This record follows: 

'arish, La., writes under 
^^.^pjll^ringly present, and in a 



later letter he asserts that the insect in question is the periodical 
Cicada with which he is familiar. 

An addition to this record was received in 1898 in a postal from 
Mr. J. W. Seaton, Strasburg, Cass County, Mo., who reports that 
they appeared there in the summer of 1892, as they did also in 1896 
(Brood XXI), being numerous both years. 

The State and county records are: 

Louisiana . — ^Morehouse . 
Missouri. — Cafls. 

fiQ. CO.— Map showing distKibution of Brood XXX, 1918. 


The periodical Cicada belongs to the Homoptera, one of the two 
divisions of the Hemiptera, or great order of sucking insects, familiar 
to the pubUc mind under the name of '^bugs, " and including, in addi- 
tion to the graceful and attractive species like the Cicada, such foul- 
smelling species as the plant bugs, squash bugs, and certain animal 
parasites. The members of the suborder Homoptera, to which the 
Cicada and its allies belong, are, however, distinctly removed from 
the lower suborder of "bugs'' just referred to, namely, the Heterop- 
tera, and as a rule lack the disgusting odor and habits of the latter 
and less esteemed suborder of sucking insects. The Homoptera as a 
rule comprise clear-winged insects, which subsist on the juices of 

'™**"'~~''-"-^'-'' — '^itSftj^ViHoften beautiful in form 
rgest and most striking 

neasurmg over 6 inches 

iJ[Bidowed with the power 

JwtfllfSfSTW^^£' them with great pop- 

poetry of nature are 
'.the present. 

all parts of the 
ig already known, and 
'^i^lg^CBilSiHaMiica, nearly one hundred 
Haiinl^ tAifj^ 9^<i^iMmt and adjacent islands. 
g'il^>'9^ailSll|| l^^ular mind are the com- 
* * — ' S ' iV-mon dog-day cicadas, or 

I -_S^ '^'harvest flieSjPepresented 
■ - ^r ** IS^y several species, the 
'"■ ' ^ most abundant of which 
'wt'S^Sj perhaps, Cicada iihv- 

W % c 


cen L. (pruinosa Say). 
The sleepy droning of 
these annually appear- 
ing species in July and 
August is commonly 
taken as a harbinger of 
greater heat and is a 
most familiar character- 
istic of midsummer. 

The periodical species 

is much more slender 

and graceful than the 

majority of the annual 

visitors, but structurally 

'•' is not very dissimilar. 

>||>ai||i It is medium sized, for 

. J"*"|"p"*':i!:^the most part black in 

i'sb^^'^t^'iSSl'K'^^ *'^^™^'^" "^ principal 

T2lqjp5^r||T*||'^^|^railarly colored. 

'S^^ll^'^^^^'^^''^'^"'^'^ attention will 
'-'™^"^'iKS3hose for taking food, or 
_ _ and depositing e^s, or 
^SgO^^iale insect. 

fsects from above reveals 

■jt transparent parchments 

„..„.. ,^ the abdomen; the short 

iJ^JP^cpJ^l^i^ycs at the lateral angles, 

Xe^ J9.. ■> ££> ai*ig ^^ j.^p^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ 


the compound eyes, 
tion of the head into 
, not especially large 
are much thickened; 

, ^ leposition of eggs pro- 

. __,„ 99'wV^wV'C9'6 of the abdomen, and 

'H<l|ttfp lil|Sf JH'II, 'ffe fissure beneath, but 
f£NVfl£^£|1St«li|B'flthe abdomen covering 
mvmm^^'Sl^*mfS^e latter is located on 

l&VWi«J(9^jeQ body sui 


Jtfi^^^^S'i "' 1'™'-'' P""''* °" **"^ '■■''' '""' 

lortant oi^ns, namely, 
laratus follow in some 


i'SS^K^i^^*^*'!!''^'^'^'''^' Cicada belongs 
'^^^^'fl]^^^^R^«hough vastly modiiicd, 
. 'li^3K^a^^'w^i°*^^^^y' *^^ upper lip 
i'^^'S^^fi'^^P^*' *^^ second, or lower, 
■ "" '^a&f ^*^J^ lip (labium) . Within 
ifi^^?^^^ the roof of the mouth 



(epipharynx) and the other (hypopharynx) attaching to the upper 
base of the lower Hp. These tongues are short and of service, prob- 
ably, in facilitating the suction necessary in raising the fluids of the 
plant to the mouth. They do not extend beyond the mouth cavity, 
and never enter the plant tissues. 

The upper lip is comparatively short, and serves its normal purpose 
as a covering for the adjacent parts of the mouth. What correspond 
to the short, powerful biting jaws of gnawing insects are in the Cicada 
greatly elongated and thread-like, and brought together to form a sort 
of piercing and sucking apparatus, which is inclosed in the greatly 
elongated lower lip. The latter is three-jointed and deeply grooved 

Fig. 33.— Head and prothorax of Cicada, lateral view, with parts separated to show structure: I, a, 
clypeus, b and c, labrum, d, epipharynx; I', same from beneath; II, mandible, a, base, 6, sheath for 
seta, c, mandibular seta, (f, muscular base of latter; III, maxilla with parts s.'milarly lettered; IV, 
labium, with three joints as follows, o, submentum, b, mentum, c, llgula'; the hypopharynx is shown 
at d, from side, d', from above, and d", from beneath; V, prothorax. (Author's illustration.") 

above so as to be almost tubular, and acts as a support and sheath for 
the piercing seta-like jaws, and also assists in conveying the liquids 
from the point of contact with the plant to the mouth cavity. The 
long lower lip just described is the piercing beak in popular belief, yet 
in point of fact it never enters the tissues of the plant, the puncture 
being made solely by the fine, stiff, needle-like jaws or setae, which can 
be projected at will by the insect with great force from the tip of the 
beak. (See figs. 81, 32, 33, and 34,a.) 

The feeding habits of the adult Cicada are discussed on pages 101- 
102. The main feeding is, however, during the long adolescent period, 
comprising the larval and pupal existence of the insect under the soil, 


■rasg/§>g«S»a- 81 

S'H'iStS^i^li^)^^!^- The structure of tlie 
^SM^^S^U99 Hiatical in essentials with 
!Sl8j|iW«SlB»tures are 
Jlll®9«fS'.SC®»ie<l expla- 

:SI8li¥tlllMftlfk0.^ta!, as tliey 
" BiSfcMlSilJ^.S'tip of the 


Jl'?g&® ■ ■onger and 
StfflF,#,'S*a>S«of biting 
HBiBllMn'P cambium 

.lcB.^ji^_§^alJJfe stronger ^,„.^._T^p^ 

.:*'-*i"-«'irSF'-^iC-*tj"'*^""^* '*" = * irritation tiodlcslClcnUu: 
*•■ — » — — **«*i'«j»*Jifc*£'«y-J?-H Ml am k^ tilis Sido view of fi> 

If '"*'—»; iMi^^^^P^S' ^^'?* induces a '■fai'. «. and 

rESlsap, which ixf^^y'- 

t:^^ji5Sp betv een 

' "S^M^^ to the lower lip and 

jS^Kpi^his along the basal por- 

'.^:^:T::fial3^;hesetse into the mouth 

• •• ■ 3L5 

.„!; :»: -a- ,«- .«. .*. .«. 



■ ■•' '':¥.% 

—Tip o£ ovipositor 
Bda, much i?nLargpd '. 
a above, b, from bc- 
,wltl] dotted portion 


C • ** ' * ■ •• • «> I III 'Sm' Kl 

'^gl'|Q<||^Bt^ edges, and are the chief 

li»18Ml|position of egge (fig. 36). 

t Hi4ln«M'Mf I i^^^ ovipositor and the 

- ^TS^WnuiS^FSS^Sfl .clasps, which make one 

IjSratflKtJI^Bfcip'flHlEMmpanjing cross sections 

ich to flat plates partly 

the abdomen, and are 

incisions in the twigs 

hich opens at the base 

the three parts of th*" 

;hey reach their final 

The act of oviposi- 

£9(48 td in another place. 


•&- '''^'2*^5^*4-'*S^'' interesting feature of 

'^a2i*'S^i'^^'<ls^ Cicada to the popular 

lal apparatus, by means 

:»j§its peculiar note, or song. 

. _ .... — „ »s'tJie*'"unds produced by 

f'^«:^:^^S^^*W heen studied and de- 

*' :¥^'^^^^^4^vt'Uralists, beginning with 

.^:Si^^^|^Eiy^^d,iiifact,the fullest and 

•:<^(^|;M$*l^^^]^ription of the method of 

*.'•§? ^i(iglB^Sj*p|S"^^ and the anatomical 

'S^^^^eS^^^^^ *^^' oi^an in these insects 

' ^^''^ jS*^^y '" *'^^ '^*' century, 

'i^nch pioneer in the study " 

'iPid anatomy of insects, 

SSfiC^dded to a hundred years 

"* specimens by another 

nical description of the 

i|^s the reader is referred 

;^tuc¥l^nt^tiese parts in our periodi- 
~ "iimportant older writers, 
fj3i#'- J- Burnett* and E. G. 

158-170, pi. 17. 
g;pp. 199-217. 


.««_. ^H^SB^B'w'fiAi the male insect only, 

"" "Jf^'small ear-like or shell- 

fifSa^ V>asal segment of the 

■ Kt?t by the action of pow- 

__ IIHj5|Dnodifie<l by adjacent 

StHbB'lftlMPiHK'Mn^tCgiing boards^and issues 
l|()'Hlty)^4||%^^^fi||''lg^'^eard is never likely to 
gjA-H^^^MOgljIgllgfit of some other insect. 
^tt^ lSrs4KHn9|?vi?iS» tlie periodical Cicada 
KK««i!s:^***"'Wiw"*'l^*'ll'* w-inga "f the resting 
lB<i^Pw«^Vlwil>>?*<?l|}'V protected by over- 

^ - 1! 

Afej-. - ■« * I 

j^l;^ •■ ^ o . ■* -is-— - ■ 

* ih -.■«■''■ -^ 

Cicada: a, view 

H ^ 7 ■f-'SficWSiCaffiMaiSEl-S*. t^ Umbals showliig as llght- 

_ i " . ,T.«t(3W4ltf»SAafcl«ri?fcfi^w of abdomen, showing attach- 

_/ ■Wiafi&.;ffl«5<£SA£3i<l»&9AE&1)al9; d,timba1 greatly enlarged, 

~ .ftJuSSoteBt^iiU&fSawiSairawn forclbl}' in by tho action ot 

igiM^^l^^iaJjMg&ig. (Author's illiistratloQ.) 

Two powerful muscles 

i'S?e base of the abdomen 

tV:^^ 'l^tling so-called song of 

t^t^h^*, as sound is produced 

i3E[)ftn which is somewhat 


jS^'C^*!!' abdomen of the insect 
occurs in the thorax 
body walls and mem- 

by the verj' peculiar 

[(!S*ke membranes situated 

fi§up[i*|||^H:|;Sr^^i covered by the semi- 
E^^^wS&C^EKijra^fiitx. These transparent 


membranes are often mistaken for the true sound organs, but they 
are rather sounding boards, or drums, to increase and transmit the 
sound vibrations induced by the play of the timbals. That they are 
not essential to the production of sound can be shown by slitting 
them or removing them altogether without there being any cessation 
of the note. Much more important modifiers of sound are the semi- 
circular disks projecting from the thorax over the ''mirrors,'^ which, 
if closed artificially or by the insect, deaden the sound very much, 
or if opened or cut off, allow it to escape in greater volume. In sing- 
ing, also, the insect modifies the song notes and their volume by rais- 
ing and lowering the abdomen, thus opening and closing these disks, 
and the act of singing is also accompanied by a sort of trembling of 
the thorax. The position assumed by the male when singing is always 
with the head upward. The abdomen is then elevated and apparently 
inflated, and with the beginning of the sound is slowly brought do^\^l 
against the limb, when the note ceases. After a rest of a few seconds 
this operation is repeated. These abdominal movements vary in 
different species of Cicada and determine in a measure the peculiar 
notes of each. 


The song of the different species of cicadas is very distinctive, and 
one familiar with the music of these insects can as readily recognize 
the particular species by its peculiar notes as one knows the different 
birds or mammals by theirs. The general character of the notes of 
the periodical species has been thus described by Dr. G. B. Smith:" 

The music or song produced by the myriads of these insects in a warm day from 
about the 25th of May to the middle of June is wonderful. It is not deafening, as 
many describe it; even at its height it does not interrupt ordinary conversation. It 
seems like an atmosphere of wild, monotonous sound, in which all other sounds float 
with perfect distinctness. After a day or two this music becomes tiresome and dole- 
ful, and to many. very disagreeable. To me it was otherwise, and when I heard the 
last note on the 25th of June the melancholy reflection occurred — shall I live to hear 
it again? 

As one approaches a colony of these insects a peculiar roar, not 
unlike the noise of a factory or a distant reaper, falls on the ears, and 
this becomes louder and more intense as one draws nearer, having at 
times to one standing in the midst of a colony a peculiar all-pervading 
and penetrating effect. The individual notes are somewhat obscured 
under these circumstances, but in the lulls the characteristic sounds 
strike the ear, and the peculiarity is never to be forgotten, especially 
the mournful falling note at the conclusion of each effort. Nearly 
all the principal writers on the Cicada, and notably Potter, Smith, 
and Fitch, have attempted to analyze the song note of this insect, 

o Scientific American, March 22, 1851. 


but the most careful study made is that by Professor Riley," who 
distinguishes three important notes as characteristic of different sea- 
sons or conditions of the aerial life of the male insect. 

The loudest and most characteristic note, and the one wliich is per- 
haps most familiar to the popular mind, is the note described by 
Fitch as *' represented by the letters tsh-e-e-E-E-E-E-e-ou, uttered 
continuously and prolonged to a quarter or half minute in length, the 
middle note deafeningly shrill, loud, and piercing to the ear, and its 
termination gradually lowered until the sound expires. " The length 
of this note given by Fitch is probably the maximum term and is 
unusual. Ordinarily it is much shorter, ranging from two or three 
to five or ten or even twenty seconds. This note is the character- 
istic one of the height of the season, when great numbers of males 
are singing together, and is rarely made by solitary individuals or 
when there are only a few together. Some instinct also seems to 
prompt the singing in unison, and as it rises at such moments the 
intensity and volume of sound has a startling and weird effect. 

The second important note is what is ordinarily known as the " Pha- 
r-r-r-aoh^' note, and is made early in the season, or when the males 
are few in number and recently emerged. The termination of this 
note is notable even more than the last for its peculiar mournful 
cadence and lowering of pitch, which is very characteristic. It lasts 
but two or three seconds. It has been compared, rather fancifully, 
I think, by Professor Riley to the whistling of a train passing through 
a short tunnel, or, when made by several individuals, more accu- 
rately to the croaking of certain frogs. 

A third, but less important, note is the clicking or intermittent 
chirping, consisting of from 15 to 30 short, quick sounds, sometimes 
double, the whole lasting about five seconds, and resembling the 
sharp clicking of the chimney swift or some of the field crickets. 

When disturbed and at the moment of taking flight the insect is apt 
to make a short cry or sharp chirp. 

All of these notes are said to occur in the small cassinii form, but of 
higher pitch and less volume, but the clicking note seems to be the 
characteristic one of this variety. 

The strength and clearness of all the notes vary with the weather 
conditions. They are loudest when the air is dry and warm and 
clear, or between the hours of 11 and 3 o'clock. On wet days, or 
when the air is unusually moist, the sound is much diminished, and 
heavy or continued rains stop it for the time altogether. 

While it is almost universally true that the song of the Cicada is 
never heard between sunset and sunrise, they will, on very rare occa- 
sions, when disturbed, start up singing in concert in the middle of 

tt Science, September 25, 1895. 


the night. Prof. A. D. Hopkins noted an instance or two of this 
kind in connection with the brood of cicadas appearing in West Vir- 
ginia in 1897. He says: 

I was fortunate enough to hear the starting of one of these concerts on a clear, moon- 
light night in June. One male in an apple tree near the house suddenly called out 
as if disturbed or frightened. His neighbors in the same tree were thus apparently 
awakened. One started the familiar song note, which was at once taken up by num- 
bers of other males, and, like the waves from a pebble dropped into still water, the 
music rapidly spread until it reached the edge of the thick woods, where it was taken 
up by thousands of singers, and the concert was in as full blast as it had been the 
previous day. This continued a few minutes, until all had apparently taken part 
and the song had reached its highest pitch, when it began to gradually subside, and 
in a short time silence again prevailed. 


With every general outbreak of this insect are associated many 
accounts in local papers of its stinging human beings, the sting often 
resulting, it is stated, more or less seriously to the person stung. Such 
accounts were especially abundant in the great Cicada year 1868, and 
in every important Cicada year before and since similar reports have 
been made. So great was the fear in 1868, as noted by Professor 
Riley, that in some cases fruits were avoided as being stung and 
poisoned, and even drinking water was sometimes under suspicion. 

So far as investigation of the reports has been possible they have 
proved to be either utterly without foundation or much exaggerated. 
Referring again to Doctor Smith's manuscript, it is seen that he spent 
much labor in carefully investigating such accounts, and found in 
every case that he followed up, where death had been reported as 
caused by the ^^bite^' or sting of the '^locusts,'' that the story was 
entirely fabulous. In the cases of apparent stinging he suggests that 
the sufferer had probably been stung by a wasp, as will be later 
explained, and soundly argues on the susceptibility of some neople to 
whom the slightest scratch becomes a source of danger. 

Professor Potter, referring to the Cicada, says in this connection: 
"It can not defend itself against an ant or a fly. We have handled 
them, male and female, time after time. We have mutilated them, 
but never could provoke them to resentment.'^ 

Professor Riley says that of the thousands which he has handled, 
and the hundreds of other persons, including children, who have also 
handled these insects, not a single bona fide case of stinging has, to 
his knowledge, resulted. 

That the periodical Cicada can pierce the flesh with its sucking beak, 
or, more properly, the fine needle-like filaments contained in it, or 
perhaps extremely rarely with the ovipositor in the case of the female, 
is quite within the bounds of possibility, and some apparently well- 
authenticated cases or reports by reliable observers bear out this view. 


There is not a particle of evidence, however, to show that such pene- 
trating is attended with the injection of any poisonous fluid, and the 
injurious consequences which follow them in rare cases are evidently 
due to unusual sensitiveness on the part of the individual, as suggested 
by Doctor Smith, or a bad condition of the blood, which would cause 
any wound to be attended with serious consequences. In this con- 
nection it is to be remembered that there are well-authenticated 
instances of most serious, if not fatal, results following the bites of 
such insects as the mosquito, and other biting flies, the result of the 
bites of which are very trivial in common experience. 

With all the reports of stings by the Cicada which have been made 
it is not to be questioned that some of them have a basis in fact. As 
suggested by Doctor Smith, and afterwards fully elaborated by 
Doctor Walsh," many of these reports are undoubtedly cases of wrong 
determination, and the stinging had probably no direct connection with 
the Cicada. There are, for example, several large digger wasps which 
provision their larval galleries with adult cicadas for the maintenance 
of their young. One of the commonest of the digger wasps is the 
species 8 phedtLsspeciosus Dru., described later on under the heading of 
the enemies of the Cicada (pp . 1 32-1 34 ) . As first suggested by Doctor 
Smith, and afterwards more fully shown by Doctor Walsh, it is not 
unlikely that this or some allied wasp, flying with its rather heavy 
burden, might strike against or alight on some human being, and upon 
being brushed off would retaliate by stinging the offender and then 
flying away, leaving the Cicada behind. In the absence of the wasp 
the Cicada would very naturally be accused of the offense. The usual 
prey of this wasp, which appears rather too late in the season to 
accoimt for all the cases of stinging reported, is the later appearing 
annual cicadas. 

The rare cases of stinging by the Cicada that have any basis in fact 
may be accounted for, as already suggested, by a thrust either of the 
ovipositor or the sucking beak. 

From the structure of the ovipositor, as already described, it will at 
once be perceived that there is nothing impossible in a wound being 
made by this instrument. The objections to this suggestion are that 
the ovipositor when not in use in placing eggs in twigs is concealed in 
a sheath in the insect^s abdomen, and also that the piercing of a twig 
or other substance by the ovipositor is a slow and laborious process, 
and therefore would not account for the quick sting usually described. 
In no case has an egg been found in the flesh, and in fact it is improb- 
able that an insect would be allowed to rest long enough on the flesh 
to accomplish the insertion of an egg. Furthermore, tests were made 
and reported by Doctor Walsh ^ and later by Professor Riley, showing 

« American Entomol(^ist, I, pp. 7, 8, September, 1868. & Loc. cit. 


the absurdity of the theory that the stinging in question is done by 
the aid of this instrument, the female not being able to puncture the 
soft, yielding flesh at all. In one test reported by Professor Riley, 
Mr. William Muir, of St. Louis, removed a female from a tree while 
she was in the act of ovipositing, and placed her on his finger. 
Although she instinctively endeavored to continue her work, she was 
not able to make the least impression on the soft, yielding flesh. A 
second experiment was made by Mr. Peter A. Brown, of Philadelphia, 
who himself made several punctures upon his hand with the ovipositor 
without experiencing any more serious results than would have 
followed pricking with a pin or other sharp instrument. In a third 
experiment, Doctor Hartman, of Pennsylvania, introduced some 
moisture from the ovipositor into an open wound and it caused no 
inflammation whatever. 

The ovipositor having been removed as the probable source of sting- 
ing, the beak only remains, and it is unquestionably by means of this 
instrument that practically all the so-called stings of the Cicada are 
made. The structure of the beak has already been discussed, and it is 
not at all improbable, though certainly a rare occurrence, that the 
Cicada, when held or caught, may thrust out the slender setae and 
puncture the skin. Many other hemipterous insects are known to 
^^ sting" in this way and to cause some severe momentary pain. The 
sensitiveness of the individual is, however, in the case of the Cicada, 
the sole criterion of injury. The authentic reports of Cicada stings 
show some variations in the effects, but as a rule the result is much 
less serious than the sting of a bee and not much more than the punc- 
ture of a needle, the wound usually healing immediately. 


The date of the issuing of the cicadas from the ground after their 
long concealment varies a little with the latitude, being later in the 
North than in the South. In the accounts of this insect published by 
Professor Riley and most other writers up to the present time it has 
been stated that there is very little divergence in the time of issuing 
between the northern and the southern broods, the latter half, or more 
strictly the last week, of May being the normal period for the emerg- 
ence of the insect throughout its range. That there may be, however, 
a considerable difference in time, depending on elevation and tempera- 
ture, in a given district and in the northern and southern parts of the 
country, also determined undoubtedly by temperature, has been fully 
established. The variation in the dates of appearance is illustrated 
by the following records: 


Doctor Phares, writing of the occurrence of Brood XXII in 1871, 
states that a few males began to appear about the 20th of April, but 
that the bulk of the brood did not emerge until the 7th and Sth of 
May, when they came forth from the earth in vast numbers, continu- 
ing to emerge in diminishing numbers until the 18th of May. It will 
be remembered that this is the most southern of all the broods — lying 
in the southwest comer of Mississippi and the adjoining parts of 

Mr. John Bartram, writing of the brood appearing in 1749, states 
that in the neighborhood of Philadelphia an abundance of these 
insects which had just escaped from their skins was observed on the 
morning of May 10 and that they continued to issue in great numbers 
for a week or more, beginning to sing on the 13th and to oviposit on 
the 16th, and disappearing-altogether by the 8th of June. 

In the great brood year of 1868 Professor Riley noted that in the 
vicinity of St. Louis "they commenced to issue on the 22d of May, 
and by the 25th of the same month the woods resounded with the 
rattling concourse of perfect insects." At Washington, D. C, in the 
Cicada year 1885, scattered individuals appeared on May 23, and they 
issued, perhaps, most abundantly on the night of the 27th. Those 
emerging within the city were somewhat earlier in appearance than 
was the case in the neighboring woods across the Potomac in Virginia, 
probably for the same reason that the trees in the city put out their 
foUage a little earUer than in the near-by woods. 

Mr. Davife, writing of Brood II as it appeared in 1894 on Staten 
Island, New York, says that as early as May 19 many cicadas had 
emerged, the first individuals of the swarm being noted six or seven 
days earUer. 

Mr. A. W. Butler, writing of the brood appearing in 1885 in Frank- 
lin County, Ind., says that while in a few localities individuals were 
seen as early as May 28, in other places not distant they did not 
emerge until June 4, and later. 

Mr. Hopkins made a careful study of the dates of emergence in West 
Virginia in 1897 in connection with Brood V, and found very consid- 
erable variation in time of appearance both between the northern and 
southern borders of the brood and between the lowest and highest ele- 
vations within the area covered by the brood. For the former a differ- 
ence of nearly two weeks was indicated by the records, and for the 
latter a difference of nearly four weeks. This variation, he says, 
appears to be due to the difference of climate between the northern 
and southern sections and between low and high elevations, in the 
former case amounting to 3 J degrees and in the latter to over 10 
degrees in average summer temperature. He deduces from his obser- 
vations, as a general rule, that there is about three and one-half days 
difference in the time of the first general appearance of the Cicada for 


each degree of difference in the average summer temperature, whether 
it be due to latitude or elevation.** 

An interesting case of artificial acceleration in the appearance of 
these insects is recorded by Professor Riley as follows: Dr. E. S. Hull, 
of Alton, 111., having placed some underground flues for forcing vege- 
tables, the unnatural heat caused the cicadas to emerge by the 20th 
of March and from this time on until May. Other instances of accel- 
eration are given in the discussion of the subject of retardation or 
acceleration in times of appearance as an explanation of the forma- 
tion of the different broods. (See p. 24.) 

Notwithstanding the difference in time of emergence in the above 
citations, the fact nevertheless remains true of the great uniformity 
evidenced in the time of emergence, namely, the last week in May, for 
the great bulk of the territory covered by the different broods of the 
Cicada, and this fact is one of the noteworthy features in the life his- 
torv of the insect. 

The males precede the females by several days and disappear earlier 
in the summer, both by reason of being shorter lived and also on 
account of their earlier appearance, so that it often happens that while 
the woods are still filled with females actively engaged in ovipositing, 
the males are altogether absent and their songs are unheard. 


Under normal conditions the Cicada remains in evidence in the 
woods five or six weeks, occasional individuals occurring later, but as 
a rule their disappearance is almost as sudden as their appearance and 
is complete in the first weeks in July. Mr. Butler, writing of the 1885 
brood in Indiana, says that twenty-three days after the appearance of 
the Cicada a perceptible decrease in numbers was observed, chiefly 
from a disappearance of the males. On July 15, nine days after they 
had disappeared from the river valley districts, they were still abun- 
dant and active in more elevated situations. Mr. Davis, writing of 
the brood of 1894 on Staten Island, says that by the third week in 
June the cicadas commenced to die of old age, and yet the males were 
still singing and the females were abundant in certain localities as 
late as the 8th of July, while by the 15th of the same month all had 

Mr. Hopkins found on the hills near Morgan town, W. Va., that the 
dates of the Cicada appearance were about normal, the first adults 
appearing on May 20, the first general appearance not coming, how- 
ever, until the 24th. Cold weather intervening, there was a subsid- 
ence again until the 30th, when they emerged again in enormous 
■^^_^^________^.^__^^^^^-^__ * 

a Bulletin 50, W. Va., Agric. Exp. Station, p. 17. 


numbers. Oviposition began on the 13th of June, and by the 17th of 
the month the leaves on the wounded twigs commenced to wither. 
All had disappeared by the 4th of July. 


In escaping from the soil the pupa burrows directly upward, but not 
always in a straight line, and under normal conditions emerges directly, 
leaving a small round hole about the size of a man's little finger. 
While it is generally true that they do not pierce the surface at all 
until they are ripe for transformation, they seem to have a frequent 
habit of penetrating nearly to the top of the ground some time before 
they actually issue and remaining usually within their burrows or 
sometimes emerging, but concealing themselves under logs, stones, 
etc., awaiting the proper moment to come forth. Usually throughout 
the month of April they are to be found thus near the surface, as has 
been recorded by many observers. 

On the authority of Professor Potter the 10th of April is usually 
the date for their appearance near the top of the ground. Here they 
are often discovered by hogs and eaten with avidity, their holes com- 
ing within a quarter of an inch of the surface and penetrating down- 
ward from 6 to 12 inches. 


Under special or peculiar circumstances, not always easily explain- 
able, the Cicada pupse construct little con'es, or chimneys, of earth 
above the surface of the soil, continuing and capping their holes, sev- 
eral weeks before the time of issuing. In addition to the names 
Cicada '^ huts' ^ or ^' cones,'' these curious structures have been variously 
termed ^Howers," ''roofs," ''chimneys," "turrets," and "adobe 

The earliest reference to them, if the writer mistakes not the sig- 
nificance of the language, and one which has hitherto been overlooked, 
is by Professor Potter.* He refers to the "roofs of their tenements" 
as being "neatly arched and so firmly cemented that water is never 
found in them, although all of the surrounding grounds are over- 
flowed and perfectly saturated," and, stating that "the locust is not 
singular in this provision," he refers, in the same connection, to the 
crayfish and other shellfish and some insects as building houses along 
water courses, where the soil is wet, resembling "small chimneys," 
as a provision against "inundation and drowning." 

The first definite account of the Cicada huts we owe to Mr. S. S. 
Rath von, of Lancaster, Pa., who described them as occurring in 
localities where the drainage was imperfect. He says: 

o Notes on the Locusta, etc., pp. 17, 18 (1839). 

itf-iH tt'^'fB 69 Hb'H their first appearance, and 

I'S''HI'^H'*'vS^£ ■^t^^^"'*' <^"t>nue their galleries 
It'B «.BI B^H 0|'M"C i'?r('»< (-vcn wilh the sur- 
H'lBf'M M' Hi) Ad'H >uld he found waiting their 
'lSti^M^W^*'fi'^»'^" helDW the k'vel of the 
**'""" '*^ ^pfiS would attach themselves to 
ItlSt'jg'in the usual manner. 
jiiwifiPl-e (fig. 39) made from 
k^Tffl' '^'''^ chamber meas- 
the inside of fiye- 

ise of the turret in this 

Bfcing, as shown by lat«r 


i|'JS'^$i9.'S''l'm'' through the 

iones of which we have 

a rather remarkable 

C-|iajg*is given by Prof. J. S. 

'fy." These cones ap- 

May and June, 1877, 

low cellar of a house 

,d been erected on the 

old orchard at Rah- 

The cellar had been 

:he depth of about a 

had been closed until 

time of the emergence 

[Jiicadas, when it was 

.d the bottom was 

be thickly beset with 

3 or tubes from 6 to 8 

igh. The explanation 

Newberry is that 

■parently attempting to 

true explanation of 

lent photograph of one 

R'iS^s^ds 6 inches in length, 

JlS''^'^^ of the occurrence of 

these structures were 

Jersey on the appear- 

ere afforded for their 

^it^ral competent observ- 

;,^itQi£iations could be made. 

W*y, 1886, 2 pp. 




The results of these investigations have cleared up much of the 
obscurity which has hitherto surrounded these elevated burrows. 

The first person to note these structures in 1894 was Mr. William 
T. Davis, who reported their occurrence in April on Staten Island, 
New York, stating that the pupae had been found on the 8th of that 
month imder boards on the edge of a meadow, where they had been 
erecting cones of earth above the damp ground. In a later article 
he says: 

On the 22d of April many pupse were found in the woods along Willow Brook under 
stones, logs, and the chips about stumps of trees cut down in winter. Many more 
were without protection of this kind, and their presence was indicated by the small 
irregular cones of earth among the dead leaves. A heavy footfall near the cone was 
sufficient to cause the insects to retreat, but if they were approached silently and 
suddenly knocked over their constructors would be found within. 

Some of the cones were 3 inches high, but they did not average 
more than 2 inches. The experience of Mr. Davis corroborates the 
theories of Professor Potter and Mr. Rathvon that the cicada cones, 
occurring in moist situations, are designed to lift the insect above 
such undesirable conditions. 

Eariy in the spring of 1894 the attention of Doctor Lintner, the 
New York State entomologist, was called by correspondents to the 
occurrence of these cones and an investigation of the subject was 
undertaken. A preliminary report was published in 1895," but his 
final report was not published until May, 1897.^ In describing the 
phenomenon in his Tenth Report, he says that the cones frequently 
occurred in many thousands and occasionally hundreds of thousands 
together, in some cases being intermingled with the ordinary open 
burrows. At New Baltimore, N. Y., 16 miles south of Albany, as 
early as the last week in April the pupae had brought up, apparently 
from a considerable depth, masses of soft clay-like material and 
molded it above the ground into conical and cylindrical structures 
for their temporary occupancy. In places the ground was almost 
covered with them, as many as twenty-five being counted to the 
square foot. The cones inclined at a considerable angle from the 
perpendicular and measured from 2 to 3^ inches in height, and 
the chamber within was uniform in diameter with the hole in the 
ground. In emerging the pupa made a round opening in the upper 
part of the chamber for its escape. 

In the Twelfth Report cited, a long list of localities in New York is 
given where the cones were found in 1894, together with notes on the 
character of the chambers and accompanying conditions of the soil, 
and also on the method of their construction. One of the plates 
illustrating this report is reproduced in this bulletin (see PI. II). It 

a Tenth Report Insects New York, pp. 420-423. 
b Twelfth Report Insects New York, pp. 279-28(). 


is a reproduction of a photograph of a small area of a cone-covered 

Two very elaborate accounts of these structures, by Mr. Benjamin 
Lander and Dr. E. G. Love, were published in 1894-95, the authors 
seeming very near the actual truth in their explanation of the 
phenomenon. Mr. Lander describes the occurrence of the cones as 
noted by him as follows: 

On the 4th of May, 1894, while in the woods on the summit of South Mountain, at 
Nyack, N. Y., I came upon a spot that had recently been burnt over. On this area I 
observed vast quantities of the Cicada structures, entirely closed, averaging about 2 J 
inches in height, the aggregation ending at the very edge of the burnt section. So 
thickly studded was the ground that often eight or ten would be found in the space 
of a square foot; in one case I counted twenty-three in such a space. Subsequent 
explorations showed that the Cicada city extended over an area of not less than 60 
acres. Eight large aggregations were discovered by me on top of the Nyack hills and 
the Palisades, covering many acres, and one near a stone quarry at a lower elevation — 
none of them in a place subject to overflow. Later, when only the ruins of the domes 
remained, I visited two areas where large numbers had been found, one in ground 
thinly covering massive sandstone and another hard by a quarry, where the top soil 
was thin. 

The explanation offered by Mr. Lander is that the dome builders, 
owing to the shallowness of the soil, determined either by the nearness 
of the underlying rocks' or of a subsoil of a character preventing the 
insects working in it effectively, had responded more quickly to the 
heat of spring and early summer, and the pupae coming prematurely 
to the surface closed and extended their burrows as a means of pro- 
tection while awaiting maturity. The extension of the gallery above 
the ground, though not suggested by Mr. Lander, may be explained 
by the same instinct which impels the insect to burrow upward from 
its subterranean cell. 

In substantiation of his theory, Mr. Lander calls attention to the 
weather records for March and April, 1 894, ^hich indicate an unusually 
high temperature throughout the region of the domed burrows, 
causing wild plants to bloom a month before their ordinary season. 
The occurrence of these structures over burned areas, which would be 
acted upon more quickly by the sun, supports his belief. Additional 
support of the same kind is an instance recorded by Prof. J. B. 
Smith ^ in a letter received from Mr. J. H. Willets, of Port Elizabeth, 
N. J. The latter states that ''On April 24 a fire from the South 
Jersey Railroad burned over several hundred acres of woodland, 
leaving the earth bare. Six days afterwards these fresh holes and 
raised tubes appeared, and yesterday the whole surface was literally 
covered with them." In further description he says: 

Imagine yourself standing out in the woods in south Jersey on 100 acres of recently 
burned ground with millions and millions of raised tubes of new earth (clay ground) 

^Annual Report State Entomologist of New Jersey for 1894, 


raised above the surface from 2 to 4 inches and from li to 2 inches in diameter, sealed 
at the top, with a hole inside extending down in the earth 12 inches at least, * * * 
and you will see mentally what I saw yesterday physically. 

In this instance also, on the authority of Mr. Lander, the turrets 
ended abruptly at the edge of the burned area. The other instances 
of these structures cited by Mr. Lander also bear out his theory. As 
a rule, they were located on rocky cliffs with uniformly shallow soil or 
in other situations where the soil in which the Cicada could work was 
shallow. Li the midst of one of the largest colonies a deep gully 
occurred, 300 or 400 feet wide, in which the soil was a deep loam. 
Here there were no domed burrows, although the hills on either side 
were covered with them, and yet at the proper season the cicadas 
appeared in the ordinary way in this gully in almost incredible num- 
bers, leaving their customary small holes of exit even with the surface. 

Some confirmatory records were obtained by Mr. Lander in 1898.* 

The occurrence of these cones, as described by Professor Newberry 
(p. 92), is confirmatory of this theory, a shallow covering of soil over 
pupae of a few inches only being left by the slight excavation made. 
A similar instance occurred in the District of Columbia in connection 
with Brood X in 1902, and represented the only occurrence of these 
structures observed that year in this vicinity. Mr. William Tindall, 
living on Washington Heights, at the northwest section of the city, 
discovered some of these curious structures in his woodshed, and an 
investigation of the premises developed the fact that this woodshed 
was studded with Cicada cones of perfect construction, varying from 
1 inch to 6 inches in height. Evidently a tree had stood about 
where the woodshed was built, and the cicadas had undergone their 
development successfully in the ground beneath. All of those coming 
to the surface outside of the shed escaped through simple holes with-^ 
out any structures above ground, but every individual which came 
up within the shed built a turret or cone. The ground floor of the 
shed was somewhat moist, rain running under, but it was rather drier 
than the ground outside, so that the cones could not have been built 
on account of the moisture. There had perhaps been a slight removal 
of surface soil in this shed, bringing the cicadas nearer to the surface 
and thus leading them to extend their galleries. Plate III is from a 
photograph taken of the cones as they appeared in the shed, and 
Plate IV illustrates half a dozen of these cones, nearly natural size, 
two of which have been cut away to show the interior character of 
the gallery. 

Dr. E. G. Love, who also studied the problem of the Cicada huts 
very carefully, agrees in the main with Mr. Lander, but differs some- 
what in his explanation. As to the conditions of their occurrence, he 
writes as follows: 

a Journal of the N. Y. Ent. Soc, Vol. VII, September, 1899, pp. 212-214. 


They arc found in })oth i^ot and dry places; on the low and on the high ground; 
singly and in colonies of many thousands. One hut, even in a damp soil, may be 
surrounded by a dozen holes, from which the insects emerge without making any 
huts, and often where we may expect to find them they are never seen. 

Accepting the theory proposed by Mr. Lander for the condition 
found to exist in the Nyack region, Doctor Love does not deem it 
entirely adequate, as he says: 

The huts are sometimes found in places in which the soil is of great depth and which 
are not especially exposed. Such was the case at Baychester, where only a fv3W huts 
were found, and these in deep soil and so well protected that it was only after careful 
search that they were discovered. 

He offers the supplementary explanation that since it is hardly 
possible that the Cicada larvae can determine instinctively the dis- 
tance to be traveled in their upward journey nor the time required 
to accomplish it, which will vary with the nature of the soil to be 
tunneled and the directness of the line followed in their excavations, 
it may often happen that individuals reach the surface before they 
are prepared to assume the adult condition, and the number so doing 
would be greater when the conditions all united to favor a short 
passage. In protected localities where the soil is deep the larvae lying 
near the surface will be more likely to emerge before their pupal 
changes are complete, and would thus be led to the construction of 
these cones. This, he says, would also explain their seeking tem- 
porary shelter, as they do, under logs and stones, as has been pre- 
viously noted. 

The explanation offered for the construction of the Cicada cones by 
Mr. Lander, as supplemented by Doctor Love, seems, on the whole, 
satisfactory and adequate, so far as the conditions studied by these 
writers are concerned. The conditions as described by Mr. Rathvon 
do not inform us as to the nature of the soil, but both in the Rathvon 
case and the later instance described by Mr. Davis, the wet character 
of the ground would seem to indicate a soil of a considerable depth. 
This would seem to give a basis of reason for the explanation suggested 
by Mr. Rathvon and accepted by Professor Riley. A complete 
hypothesis, therefore, seems to be in a union of the explanations 
offered, namely, that the cone-building habit is induced either by a 
shallow soil, proximity of the pupae to the surface, or conditions of 
unusual warmth which brings the pupae to the surface in advance 
of their normal time, and more rarely to unfavorable conditions of 
excessive moisture. The mud caps are to protect the burrow from 
cold until the time of issuing arrives. 

The explanation of the occurrence of these structures on high 
ground suggested by Professor Riley is certainly untenable. He 
surmised that the individuals constructing cones in such situations 
did so because impelled by habit that had become fixed and hered- 



►^.jj. .jj. ^. -jjj. -jjj. .^. .^. .^. 


itary in the course of a long period of existence in low wet situations. 
The strict limitation of these cones to areas presenting peculiar 
conditions thoroughly disproved this theory. 

Some notes on the character of the huts may be appended. The 
fact that there is no exit orifice at the ground, as described by Mr 
Ralhvon, is confirmed by the studies made by the observers cited 
above, the insect invariably clawing its way out at the top. Mr. 
Lander notes one instance where the pupal shell remained attached 
and stuck in the summit of the burrow, the mature insect having 
escaped. According to Mr. Tjander, also, the huts are probably con- 
structed at night, the insect taking advantage of the moist air, which 
would prevent the too rapid drying of the earth used in making the 
little tower and also of the delicate soft insect itself. The chambers 
are constructed with soft pellets of clay or mud brought up from below 
and pressed firmly into place. On examination it will be seen that 
they are well rounded and rather firmly compacted within, although 
the marks of the claws of the pupae are usually visible and leaves and 
sticks are often incorporated in the walls. No one has actually 
observed the insects while at work on these structures, and, although 
Mr. Ijander repeatedly broke off a number of cones to see if they would 
be repaired, the insect failed to do so while being watched. Subse- 
quently the broken portions were found to be recapped, but at some 
little distance below the broken edge. In this connection may be 
quoted the observation of Mr. Lawton, of Nyack, cited by Doctor 
Lintner. Mr. Lawton found that in every case except one the pupa 
repaired the cone soon after the injury by bringing up pellets of mud 
and roofing over the broken portion about half an inch from the top. 
The repairs were begun on one side and gradually extended over the 
opening horizontally, there being no attempt to form a dome-shaped 
roof. In some instances the repairing of the chamber began within 
a quarter to half an hour after injury had been caused, and within 
three or four hours the opening was entirely closed over. On one 
occasion a pupa was caught with a pellet of mud in its claws. 

The fact that these cones had been noted on only two or three occa- 
sions prior to 1884 led to the belief that they were very rare and 
abnormal. Their extraordinarv abundance in 1884 in connection with 
Brood II would seem to indicate that they are by no means as rare as 
heretofore supposed, and it may be inferred that the absence of records 
is simply due to the lack of examination, especially in localities where 
the conditions would be favorable for their appearance. This view is 
confirmed bv the announcement in a recent letter from Mr. Davis of 
the discovery of a cone April 30, 1898, on Staten Island belonging to 
Brood VI, which appeared that year. He says that the cone was just 
appearing above the dead leaves, which, with the ground also, were 

31117— No. 71—07 7 


''soaked after the wet days just past.'' This beUef is participated in 
by Doctor Lintner in his last report on this interesting subject." It 
should not be forgotten, however, that the great mass of the insects 
emerge without making any superficial construction whatever. 


The phenomenon connected with the transformation of the period- 
ical Cicada from the pupal to the adult stage is a very interesting one 
and always fills the observer with considerable wonderment. As 
remarked by Mr. Butler, when these insects emerge from the ground 
it is usually with a rush, and a lively scramble ensues for each eleva- 
tion near the point of their emergence. Trees, bushes, weeds, poles, 
stumps, fences — in fact, everything upon which they can get above the 
level of their recent homes is ascended. The instinct which has 
caused them to burrow to the surface of the ground still drives them 
in the same direction upward, and they seem to make up in activity 
for their long subterranean periods and their weeks of waiting near the 
surface when the time has finally arrived for their emergence. The 
different steps undergone by the insects iu transforming from the 
pupal to the adult stage have been perhaps most accurately described 
by Professor Riley, as given below.^ The plate accompanying his 
description is reproduced in this bulletin as a frontispiece. 

The unanimity with which all those which rise within a certain radius of a given tree 
crawl in a bee line to the trunk of that tree is most interesting. To witness these pupse 
in such vast numbers that one can not step on' the ground without crushing several 
swarming out of their subterranean holes and scrambling over the ground, all converg- 
ing to the one central point, and then in a steady stream clambering up the trunk and 
diverging again on the branches, is an experience not readily forgotten and affording 
good food for speculation on the nature of instinct. The phenomenon is most satis- 
factorily witnessed where there is a solitary or isolated tree. 

The pupae (frontispiece, figs. 1 and 2) begin to rise as soon as the sun is hidden behind 
the horizon, and they continue until by 9 o'clock the bulk of them have risen. A few 
stragglers continue until midnight. They instinctively crawl along the horizontal 
branches after they have ascended the trunk, and fasten themselves in any position, 
but preferably in a horizontal position on the leaves and twigs of the lowermost 
branches. In about an hour after rising and settling, the skin splits down the middle 
of the thorax from the base of the clypeus to the base of the metanotum (frontispiece, 
^. 3), and the forming Cicada begins to issue. * * * 

The colors of the forming Cicada are a creamy white, with the exception of the reddish 
eyes, the two strongly contrasting black patches on the prothorax, a black dash on each 
of the coxjB and sometimes on the front femora, and an orange tinge at the base of 

There are five marked positions or phases in this act of evolving from the pupa shell, 
viz, the straight or extended, the hanging or head downward, the clinging or head 
upward, the flat winged, and, finally, the roof winged. In about three minutes after 
the shell splits the forming imago extends from the rent almost on the same plane with 

a Twelfth Report Insects New York, p. 283. 

& Annual Rept. Dept. of Agriculture, 1885, pp. 237, 238. 


Pfl'S:S»<F* ■ I »>'cl' ' ■ >^$>* 

->£*' ♦ *Jfc* *tt* *vff ♦ '^" *&* •&* 


the pupa, with all its members straight and still held by their tips within the exuvium 
(frontispiece, fig. 4). The imago then gradually bends backward and the members 
are loosened and separated. With the tip of the abdomen held within the exuvium, 
the rest of the body hangs extended at right angles from it, and remains in this position 
from ten to thirty seconds or more, the wing pads separating, and the front pair stretch- 
ing at right angles from the body and obliquely crossing the hind pair (frontispiece, 
figs. 5 and 6). They then gradually swell, and during all this time the legs are becom- 
ing firmer and assuming the ultimate positions. Suddenly the imago bends upward 
with a good deal of effort, and, clinging with its legs to the first object reached, whether 
leaf, twig, or its own shell, withdraws entirely from the exuvium, and hangs for the 
first time with its head up (frontispiece, figs. 7 and 8). Now the wings perceptibly 
swell (frontispiece, fig. 8) and expand until they are fully stretched and hang flatly 
over the back, perfectly transparent, with beautiful white veining (frontispiece, fig. 9). 
As they dry they assume the roofed position (frontispiece, fig. 10), and during the night 
the natural colors of the species are gradually assumed (frontispiece, fig. 11). 

The time required in the transformation varies, and, though for the splitting of the 
skin and the full stretching of the wings in the flat position the time is usually about 
twenty minutes, it may be, under precisely similar conditions, five or six times as long. 
But there are few more beautiful sights than to see this fresh forming Cicada in all the 
different i)ositions, clinging and clustering in great numbers to the outside lower leaves 
and branches of a large tree. In the moonlight such a tree looks for all the world as 
though it were full of beautiful white blossoms in various stages of expansion. 

A more realistic idea of tlie important stages in this transformation 
is furnished perhaps by a series of photographs kindly given to the 
writer by Mr. Robert A. Kemp, of Frederick, Md. (see PI. VI). A 
more natural position is given if figs. 1 and 2 are turned so as to make 
the twigs perpendicular rather than oblique. 


In the case of a well-established brood under favorable conditions, 
the enormous numbers of these insects in the soil is most vividly 
conveyed by the accompanying photograph (fig. 40) taken by Mr. 
Kemp in 1902 (Brood X), near Frederick, Md. Within the foot- 
square area in the center of the photograph are no less than 84 
openings, which would indicate for the ground surrounding a fairly 
good-sized tree the emergence of from 30,000 to 40,000 Cicada pupae. 

Mr. McCook took the trouble to count or estimate the burrows 
under various trees. Under one tree he counted 9,000 burrows, and 
under another, a small birch, the number of exit holes was esti- 
mated at 22,500; and since many of the burrows interlaced under 
ground and several insects emerged from the same opening, even 
these figures do not indicate the actual number. In another case 
668 openings were counted in a space 10 by 4 feet, and 17 distinct 
openings in a space 6 inches square. 

Mr. Davis, referring to Brood II on Staten Island in 1894, says: 

About some of the trees the pupa shells became so numerous that they completely 
hid the ground itself. At dusk the sound of the many insects climbing up the tree 


f'i^lMg^^g^'iJg^* ' yj«f*;:'^n'||J%BCelldiDg the trees t 

to leaves, still further 
lich often emei^e. 
*"#)■., the cicadas do not 


iw^w'— ^tt' V'«**H W^'^^'° ^" infested 

|5it^^Tg^'t^^»;ji9^lg^|jt|ls. the greater scarcity 
''K^^Sli^lvik^K.i'' ^^^ ratthng choru's 

'm'^'^S^'H^^Bw wishing of the Cicada in 
,llHt«i|H"£!j|}|l|{Klapparently not always 

Itft R Mi^'^'Z^i'-y through the Cicada 
p J^'»^3||^iSi'.iB3on of the reappearance 
J|il«l#llfcWi^^^^pproached the eastern 


more numerous, and 

the Cicada was 

E*C^*bI* to occur in far greater 

If-rsed. The leaves and 

insects, and the twigs 

^^^ _,^,^__Jseems to have been the 

i^u^^^^i^D:*!^ farther up the cicadas 


in rather well-defined 

[•^i^od, or, in other words, 

;^i^>'«^talion in abundance is 

"Jftctor of the soil and in 

,^S»c5t^p, as of timber growth, 

ui4B^fa^*3wrf9M%;^S^es, and are most abun- 

.gt-^^Sisigi^S Jiif^s«f;pn5i ^ 

I^^Ci^ie^ER IODIC AL Cicada. 

*^' ^^i*^*"*"" ^""" P"P*' ''"'"■ 3— A^l'lt 
^u|a ailiilt, ihe coloring tmmHture, 
^^OTJj^ malure. About natural size. 
► .jj. .g. ^. ^. ^. ,^. .j(. .j(. 


dant where the land is high and well drained and the soil a rich, 
sandy loam, with a sandy or soft clay subsoil. The irregularity of 
local distribution is confirmed also by the experience of Mr. Davis on 
Staten Island, who reports of the 1894 brood that the cicadas were 
very rare in sandy districts, while in districts less sandy they appeared 
by thousands. He says also that they occurred by millions on certain 
hills and in certain bits of woodland, yet at a short distance away, 
under apparently unaltered conditions, they were very scantily 

The local abundance of the Cicada in well-defined districts is to 
be explained by the fact, already noted, that the winged insect is 
sluggish and scatters but little from the point of emergence, which, 
with favoring circumstances, tends constantly to concentrate rather 
than to scatter the species. 


At the time of the writing of Bulletin 14 the observations of many 
entomologists who had studied the periodical Cicada were practically 
in accord that the taking of food in the adult stage was not a neces- 
sary feature of the aerial life of the insect and was of comparatively 
rare occurrence. Feeding to a limited extent had been shown, how- 
ever, by the observations of Walsh and Riley," and an additional 
instance is noted by Riley in Bulletin 8.^ The observations by Mr. 
Davis'' were referred to in Bulletin 14, reporting that the black 
birch and sweet gum are favorite food plants, and that it is not 
uncommon to see rows of cicadas along the branches of these trees 
with their beaks embedded in the bark. Various other entomolo- 
gists had noted a little feeding, but the opinion was general that the 
feeding habit was unusual and not necessary to the insect. State- 
ments had also been made that such feeding was limited to the 
female, and that the male could take no food inasmuch as its digestive 
organs were rudimentary. No special harm from feeding, at any 
rate, had ever been noticed, even where the insect occurred in count- 
less m3rriads. 

With the recurrence of Brood X in 1902 Mr. A. L. Quaintance, 
then entomologist of the Maryland experiment station, had his 
attention called to the feeding of the periodical Cicada and made a 
thorough study of the subject.^ A correspondent called the atten- 
tion of Mr. Quaintance to the feeding of the Cicada in his orchard, 
and an examination of a local orchard confirmed this fact, which he 
afterwards noticed in various localities in Maryland. Cicadas in 

a American Entomologist, Vol. I, p. 67, 1868. 

b Bill. 8, o. s., Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, p. 14. 

c Natural Science Assn. Staten Island, 4, September, 1894, pp. 33-35. 

dBul. 37, n. s., Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, pp. 90-94, PI. I. 


numbers together were often observed with their beaks stuck straight 
down against the bark in the attitude of feeding, and in numerous 
instances the insects were observed when disturbed extracting the 
thread-Uke setse from the plant tissue. Early in the morning or 
late in the evening also the limbs of youxig apple and pear trees 
were frequently quite wet with sap which had exuded from the 
punctures made with the setae of the cicadj^rS. This exudation of 
sap was frequently noticed to immediately follow the withdrawal of 
the sucking apparatus of the insect to such an extent as to run down 
the trunk a distance of 4 or 5 inches. 

Feeding was also observed in forest trees growing near the college 
buildings by means of an opera glass. In the case of forest trees 
the insects commonly go to the upper branches and hence are not 
near enough for observation from the ground, a fact which may 
account somewhat for the failure hitherto to have observed this habit 
of taking food. 

Professor Quaintance also made cross sections of the wood, show- 
ing that the setae had actually penetrated deeply into the sapwood 
of the trees. Both sexes were shown to feed to an equal extent, 
and dissections of the insects themselves showed the stomach to be 
distended to several times its usual size with sap taken.f rom the trees, 
and the alimentary canal was found to be perfect in both sexes and 
not rudimentary in the male, as hitherto believed. The intestine 
was very minute, but could be traced from the oesophageal to the anal 

Professor Quaintance^ s observations undoubtedly indicate that the 
Cicada in the adult stage normally takes food in the same way as do 
other hemipterous insects, and the fact that when these insects are 
kept in confinement for a few days without food they invariably die 
would seem to indicate the necessity of liquid food. Mr. Quaintance 
himself, however, queried if the amount of feeding might not vary 
with different broods; and that the Cicada necessarily and always 
takes food has not yet been fully established. 

The taking of food by the Cicada at any rate seems to cause the 
trees normally very little injury and is not accompanied apparently 
by any special poisoning of the wo6d which causes the death or 
sloughing off of bark, as is more or less the case with the San Jose 
scale, for example; and the belief expressed in Bulletin 14 may be 
perhaps adhered to, that, so far as real injury is concerned, the feeding 
in the adult stage is a negligible feature. 


The fact has already been alluded to that the common name 
'' locust, ^^ given by the early colonists to this insect, was undoubtedly 
owing to a confusion of the Cicada with the migratory locust of the 


Orient, which has been an article of diet from the earUest times, and 
is so employed at the present day, in various places in northern 
Africa and eastern Asia. A similar locust is also now highly esteemed 
as a food article in the island of Madagascar. All of these locusts 
belong, however, to the class of insects known as grasshoppers, and 
on this continent the Rocky Mountain grasshopper or locust has also, 
as is well known, been long used as an article of food by certain 
Indian tribes. 

That the Cicada was eaten by the red men of America, both before 
and after the coming of the colonists, is indicated in a memorandum, 
dated 1715, left by the Rev. Andreas Sandel, of Philadelphia, who, 
referring to the use of locusts as food in eastern Asia, states also 
that the Cicada is so used by the Indians. Dr. Asa Fitch corroborates 
this statement, giving as his authority Mr. W. S. Robertson, who 
informs him '^ that the Indians make the different species of Cicada 
an article of diet, every year gathering quantities of them and pre- 
paring them for the table by roasting in a hot oven, stirring them 
until they are well browned.'^ 

No practical test was made with the Cicada as an article of human 
food until the experiments instituted by Professor Riley and carried 
out by Doctor Howard in the early summer of 1885. The following 
is an account of Doctor Howard's experiments: 

With the aid of the Doctor's (Riley's) cook he had prepared a plain stew, a thick 
milk stew, and a broil. The Cicadse were collected just as they emerged from pupse, 
and were thrown into cold water, in which they remained overnight. They were 
cooked the next morning, and served at breakfast time. They imparted a distinct 
and not unpleasant flavor to the stew, but were not at all palatable themselves, as 
they were reduced to nothing but bits of flabby skin. The broil lacked substance. 
The most palatable method of cooking is to fry in batter, when they remind one of 
shrimps. They will never prove a delicacy. ^^ 

Mr. T. A. Keleher, who sampled some of the dishes above described, 
has informed the writer that he found the cicadas fried in batter to 
be most palatable, and that he much preferred them to oysters or 

The great liking manifested by various animals for the pupse before 
and after they have emerged and for the transforming adults has 
already been referred to. Doctor Hildreth, writing in 1830, says: 

While here they served for food for all of the carnivorous and insect-eating animals. 
Hogs eat them in preference to any other food; squirrels, birds, domestic fowls, etc., 
fatten on them. So much were they attracted by the Cicadee that very few birds 
were seen around our gardens during their continuance, and our cherries, etc., 
remained unmolested. & 

a Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington, Vol. I, p. 29. 
ft Journal of Science, 1830, Vol. XVIII, p. 47. 


He also states that when the cicadas first leave the earth they are 
plump and full of oily juices; so much so that they are employed in 
making soap. 

Mr. John Bartram, writing of the brood which appeared near Phila- 
delphia in 1749, and referring to the pupse as they appeared near the 
surface of the ground toward the end of April, says ttiat they were then 
full of a thick white matter like cream and that hogs rooted up the 
ground a foot deep in search of them. Dr. Potter refers briefly to the 
fact that great numbers of them are "devoured by hogs, squirrels, 
all kinds of poultry, and birds, which live and fatten on them.^' 

That they are sometimes considered to be poisonous when made an 
object of food is indicated in the following quotation from Doctor 
Phares. He says: 

Many species of domestic and wild birds, quadrupeds, and other animals eat the 
cicadas greedily and with impunity. In 1859 they were said to have killed a few 
hogs in Amite County. They have no poison about them, yet it is not to be wondered 
at that an occasional hungry hog or other animal, eating very largely of such food, 
should become sick or even die. Dogs become very fond of them. One evening I 
watched a bitch catching and eating so many that I expected her to become sick from 
her rich feast of fat things, but she was in no way injured. Indeed, I have never seen 
any animal injured or otherwise. 

As has been indicated elsewhere, the liking of domestic animals and 
birds, especially the English sparrow, for the cicadas, both in their . 
newly emerged condition and in the mature state, is one of the most 
potent influences in exterminating or greatly reducing the abundance 
of this insect in thickly settled districts. 

The use of the newly emerged and succulent cicadas as an article of 
human diet has merely a theoretical interest, because, if for no other 
reason, they occur too rarely to have any real value. There is also 
the much stronger objection in the instinctive repugnance which all 
insects seem to inspire as an article of food to most civilized nations. 
Theoretically, the Cicada, collected at the proper time and suitably 
dressed and served, should be a rather attractive food. The larvas 
have lived solely on vegetable matter of the cleanest and most whole- 
some sort, and supposedly, therefore, would be much more palatable 
and suitable for food than the oyster, with its scavenger habit of 
living in the muddy ooze of river bottoms, or many other animals 
which are highly prized and which have not half so clean a record as 
the periodical Cicada. 


The Cicada becomes almost perfectly hardened and mature during 
the first day of its aerial life, and does not wait many days before 
beginning the important business of its existence in the perfect stage, 
namely, depositing the eggs for another brood. Courtship occupies 
a comparatively short time, and the sexes are found together usually 



within a week after the emergence of the first individuals. Within 
two weeks the egg punctures begin to appear here and there in the 
twigs. From this time on oviposition proceeds very rapidly, and 
thousands of individuals may often be noted working at the same 
time on the same tree. 


The fact that the Cicada is not especially choice in its selection of 
trees in which to place its eggs is patent to any careful observer, 
although a preference is generally shown for oaks and hickories, and 
the apple among the fruit trees. Any plant which presents itself is, 
however, accepted, often herbaceous ones and occasionally evergreens, 
although the sticky resinous sap of the latter seems to be distasteful 
to these insects. No careful, complete list of plants in which they ovi- 
posit has been made, although several observers have made rather 
extensive lists, notably Mr. Butler and Mr. Davis, the latter having 
observed the cicadas laying their eggs in between seventy and eighty 
trees, bushes, and herbaceous plants on Staten Island in 1894, and 
states also that he had evidently not nearly reached the limits of 
plants. In some cases even the large petioles of plants, like the horse- 
chestnuts, had been oviposited in. A list of plants could be given 
which have been put on record, but it would have but little value, as 
in every district in which they appear they will oviposit in practi- 
cally all plants which come their way, with the exception of pines, as 
already stated, which are ordinarily exempt. 

That they are not very choice in this matter is shown by a case of 
faulty instinct reported by Mr. Hunter Nichols, who observed a female 
to alight on the iron rod of a bridge and attempt to insert her eggs, 
even extruding them to the number of seven, some of which remained 
attached to the rod and the others falling to the ground. Other 
similar cases of error on the part of the insect are noted by Mr. Davis. 
In one instance a female had attempted to insert her eggs in the 
very hard stem of catbriar (Smilax rotundifolia) and in another place 
had thrust her ovipositor entirely through the stem of a plant only to 
find that it was hollow. 

The part of the plant selected for a receptacle for the eggs is almost 
invariably the twigs of the previous year's growth. When larger limbs 
are chosen, as occasionally happens, the female evinces her dislike for 
them by constructing only a nest or two instead of the long series of 
slits which are usually characteristic of her work on limbs of newer 


it hr 
of Al 

of Mm 

tion nl 

the <^r( 
torv of 

in the 
the woo 
the mai 


1_ ..--.rr iZ»: m 

-- ----L1I7 in 

- "-^-^ i: 41.' 
s : i-rzi :.. be 

■ J- ji .. iZti 'ie 

- _ _ ir^^il^ii is 
- ------ rring 

• :_r Tizi'^r of 

woods ii 
a rule th 
is compl* 
brood in 
the Cica< 
from a d ■ 
had disa] 
dant and 
the broo( 
June th(^ < 
still singi 
late as th< 

Mr. IToi 
dates of t 
ever, until 
ence a^aii 


• "fc" 

^ i . i r 5 from 



— _; -I' 

• '*>'' '»* 


.,. .-« tiai they 


|llowing year and fell (o the ground, thua 
faring branc hew." 

iVl!?llME*fflljlilfsVee8 suffer most, and even grapt 
M0.*&*£BH&(l^^@<>ruit trees in vigorous condition i 
__i ••'fe^^^^^Slfii^ro'iunds heal in a few years so that 
fl WiSi§^ J*WT«fcgJ!d ; but, as shown by Dr. A. D. 
'j&'£^'^IBlNiB0ilttjPim'trees, the growth of which is ! 
tsi^^« > K JricB J!?iJ!?ial branches of old trees which h 
g'^SVWf'l|}§^)^'§^ for many years. 

"^ ' "* ~ " been charged to this insect 

after filling the twigs with 

„. ., or partly severs it, causing it 

>•' iljBfSlHltetally without foundation in i&> 
mm 'JaTBI^Bg'J M [^'"iSm the observation that many i 
iB^^^,;9i#<*"SfSiBpartly on a confusion of the wo 
l>§"^5f •^*^iS.^^ak-prunhig beetles, which after 
i fc."J^ Ft™^ ^Jl j g I O"" nearly off, causing them to f 
. Jrfc* .«.a.!K.B<i-9r. **2 - larvae the dead or dying wood 

!ory that the Cicada purposely 

cause them to break off is 8ho^v 

is broken, through the weaken 

!r causes, and falls to the ground 

;s the eggs to shrivel and c 

ore, is purely accidental, and is 

to the smaller terminal twigs wl 

in, the female by so doing defe 

n of such broken and fallen twi 

the tree a deadened appearance 

Ly thicker and stouter limbs whic 

re than 90 per cent of all the ( 

those that ultimately hatch, ai 

Iff, though often much injured. 

twigs which are partly broker 

sap has not been entirely stop] 

: punctures on the twigs is shoi 

zes their subsequent growth. 

Iftures usually assume a wart or 

in the accompanying illustrati 

'ect of punctures in hard-maple t' 

is shown in fig. 43, and on vario 

lustrations being kindly loaned n 

;ly healing over exteriorly with tl 

w -■- -■L-Bs- Ileport Insects New York, p. 177. 

$;^SfllE3&%^^a. AgT. Exp. Sto., Pis. II and IV. 


smaller twigs by the 
described, and is apt to 
V^lEttSiQI noteworthy and disas- 
"' W'sV m^S^^ *^^ ^"^^ favorite trees 
Nij||(«^6^t,^kory, and apple, and in 
Him A'^HpH^^ latter, especially in 
H\»yiiB'W'W^s surrounded by woods, 

R«Srir«*^^t^«a"iig8. (See fig. 41.) 
^i^S$fAtmtg of the twigs by the 
i)Kt'S9iM'Val^s many of them to be 
■Mj^flSlSl ofT by the winds, and 
,^avitr-|^|gj^^thered leaves are con- 

I M>f2*)@4'*— ''^^^'"^^'^''^'''^^''^^^'^™~ 

Nsai VjPitSf the twigs break off en- 

R'finlEttR'S*^'^ *'^^ ground, and the 

fJ!»^ •fftJ^iP'^iii'iS which results is 

tM^TrS^^iderable extent, giving 

'*T*^i^t&^Kf^ sometimes described, a 

j!^i^f;llg|^arance, or as though 

'* -J-e^'S^^^^^re, from the number of 

J* t^"*i'i*''!^^'^®^s of twigs thus injured. 

~ " ' "-ly trees 



igoiMBlete, or 

[ddr, Wil- puncturea after the 

lustrates ^-d^ye«. (ak« 

f^t^^^Sring to 

'it^ti 1826, he says: 

S^S"'®* complrtely. Nearly all the 
^^%d!^Wlepo8n of the eggB that thejr 


broke from the main stems in the following year and fell to the ground, thus completely 
denuding the trees of their fruit-bearing branches-^ 

Peach, pear, and apple trees suffer most, and even grapevines are 
often badly injured. With fruit trees in vigorous condition and grow- 
ing rapidly, however, the wounds heal in a few years so that often the 
scars can scarcely be detected ; but, as shown by Dr. A. D. Hopkins, 
with recently transplanted trees, the growth of which is slow, and 
with the fruiting and terminal branches of old trees which lack vigor, 
the wounds often do riot heal for many years. 

Another form of injury has been charged to this insect by some 
of the earlier writers, viz, that after filling the twigs with her egg 
clusters the female completely or partly severs it, causing it to break 
off and die. This opinion is totally without foundation in fact, and is 
imdoubtedly based partly on the observation that many twigs are 
broken by the winds and partly on a confusion of the work of the 
Cicada with that of certain oak-pruntng beetles, which after oviposit- 
ing in the branches, cut them nearly off, causing them to fall to the 
ground, thus furnishing their larvae the dead or dying wood in which 
they develop. 

The absurdity of the theory that the Cicada purposely cuts the 
limbs to weaken them and cause them to break off is shown by the 
fact that wherever a limb is broken, through the weakening from 
excessive puncturing or other causes, and falls to the ground, the dry- 
ing up of the limb invariably causes the eggs to shrivel and die. The 
breaking off of limbs, therefore, is purely accidental, and is confined, 
so far as due to the Cicada, to the smaller terminal twigs which have 
been too thickly oviposited in, the female by so doing defeating her 
own object. The proportion of such broken and fallen twigs, while 
often great enough to give the tree a deadened appearance, is small 
in comparison with the many thicker and stouter limbs which remain 
attached, and probably more than 90 per cent of all the eggs, and 
more than 99 per cent of those that ultimately hatch, are laid in 
twigs which never break off, though often much injured. A very 
few young may come from twigs which are partly broken off, but 
in such instances the flow of sap has not been entirely stopped. 

The after effect of the egg punctures on the twigs is shown in the 
deformity which characterizes their subsequent growth. In the 
process of healing the punctures usually assume a wart or knot-like 
appearance, as represented in the accompanyiag illustration of an 
apple twig (fig. 42). The effect of punctures in hard-maple twigs after 
the lapse of seventeen years is shown iti fig. 43, and on various plants 
in Plate I (see p. 12), these illustrations being kindly loaned me hj Dr. 
Hopkins.* Though ultimately healing over exteriorly with the growth 

a Lintner, Second Report Insects New York, p. 177. 
& Bulletin 50, W. Va. Agr. Exp. Sta., Pis. II and IV. 

center of the twig a 

the escaping larvas 

have been inserted in 

'i^.^iW^' SS M ^ n' 

^?i1|?l)^''*Q$C^'V li^ Cicada, in that as long 
'*^'Vi?t!ft B S)^f'=*' ^^^ limbs they are not 
ttw B iS'fi^^'tfl^' but they offer attroct- 
I ^Sf'llV''^'"^*^''^^''^'^""^ insects. If left 
■WiiVt'mP&S'm'iU^'mfS,^'^, except for the ecars, 

iipots complete the work 

r^iS^ti^^aSSn ESiaSSa^i i^^ Hi 

Ll^lia^a^* BCvcntcen yean. (HopUns.) 

!H;;^;ur therm ore, such open 
!^:x£es Doctor Hopkins has 
^vllie woolly aphis (Sckison- 
[)^^^Hch not only prevents the 
" j^bnormal growth, adding 
i*^*and making them more 


pst invariably with the 
'branch, the work being 

„ _ mt^^ 6ggs IS an interesting 
QlShgind the presence of an 
JllBiMffl|(;hed without herexhib- 

■•— ^ '" •■•9"^S^*^^o'*fil*''^'" ^"^"^ ^ interfered 
i>**jH>,&ffHu9'aAais,v.*;^ of moving to one side 
jhus extends her row of 
i'base of the intervening 
I size which tlie female 
ii^^to give her tlie strong 
i'lier ovipositor into the 

■ i. : Ai»-r 1 II 

md depositing the eggs 

■.af -i*.V-i'.-- 
ii ' ."•■ ■ C = 

n^WMKo show Brmngcmtnl of (■^ 

•«*'Se*.'gg eartty expoaed alter e| 
— — . .^j^ bytfte ovlpoBiti 

L^i-an angle of 45 degrees, 
;^-bark and wood, the two 
flully inserted the instru- 
_ _ SSmen, raising and loosen- 

^^uj^^^3^4k!&i^«maining attached, fonn 
:!<M.<3>:.^eui .80.^2^^,^ fjig cutting normally 
_ ifth of an inch in deptli, 
!-'S'®eive from ten to twenty 
_j2L§l*i^^ibed, the female moves 
i^^irKfc|p!^I^i^^ thrusts in her oviposi- 
'^[*'^*'^&^S^'^S^^^'^^^^™'''*' ^ convey the 

ip^i^gjn pairs, separated by a 
taJ^ien left undisturbed, and 
it(®; Two eggs having been 


inserted in the portion of the fissure first made, the ovipositor is 
withdrawn and again inserted, and two more eggs are placed in line 
with the first; this operation being continued until the egg nest is 
filled. A step or two forward is then taken, and after a brief pause 
a new egg nest is begun. About fifteen minutes is occupied in pre- 
paring and filling one of these nests with eggs. 

The above account is substantially correct so far as the superficial 
appearances are concerned. Instead, however, of first making an egg 
nest and afterwards filling it with eggs in pairs, as described, the female 
deposits the row of eggs on one side as she makes the original cutting 
in the bark. She then moves back, and, swinging a little to one side, 
inserts through the same hole the second row of eggs parallel with the 
first, thus leaving a small bit of imdisturbed wood fiber between the 
two rows of eggs. This method of inserting the eggs corresponds to 
that known to be true of allied insects which deposit their eggs in prac- 
tically the same manner, and is confirmed also by the careful observa- 
tions made by Mr. Ira H. Lawton, of Nyack, N. Y., in 1894, and 
reported by Professor Lintner." Mr. Lawton foimd that the placing 
of each row of eggs occupied a little over twenty minutes, or, for the 
construction and filling of the double egg nest, some forty-five minutes. 
During the cutting of the fissure the ovipositor made about eighty 
strokes per minute, and after four chambers were made the female 
would indulge in a short rest. 

The number of nests made in a single twig varies from four or five to 
fifteen or twenty, the latter number being not at all unusual, and as 
many as fifty egg nests in a line, each containing fourteen to twenty 
eggs, have been found in a single limb. The punctures are often 
made so close to each other that they sometimes run together, so as to 
form a continuous slit for 2 or 3 inches. 

The Cicada passes from one limb or from one tree to another until 
she has exhausted her store of eggs, which have been estimated to 
number from four to six hundred. By the time the egg-laying is com- 
pleted the female becomes so weak from her incessant labor that she 
falls to the ground and perishes or soon becomes a victim to her various 
natural enemies. 


The eggs remain in the twigs for six or seven weeks after being 
deposited. Professor Potter was one of the first to determine this 
rather unusually long egg period by marking certain egg clusters and 
watching them until the young larvae were disclosed. He reports that 
from eggs deposited on the 5th of June he witnessed the hatching of 
the young on the 28th of July. This statement is also corroborated by 

a Twelfth Report Insects New York, p. 275. 


Doctor Smith. Miss Morris and others record a shorter period, and 
there is undoubtedly considerable variation due to weather conditions, 
but the normal period, as shown by the abundant records of this oflSce, 
and many observers, since those noted, ranges, as stated, from six to 
seven weeks. Some interesting instances have been noted of retarded 
development of eggs in plants yielding gummy exudations which had 
hermetically closed the nests from the outer air. Professor Riley 
notes a case of this kind where the eggs remained soimd and un- 
hatched until the end of the year, long after the trees had shed their 
foliage. Except in the extreme south, where all of the periods are 
somewhat earlier, the eggs are deposited chiefly in the month of Jime 
and most abundantly about the middle of this month, and the hatch- 
ing period ranges from the middle of July to the first of August. 

The egg is a very delicate, pearly- white object, about one- twelfth of 
an inch long, tapering to an obtuse point at either end and slightly 
curved. The shell is very thin and transparent, the form of the larval 
insect showing through some time before hatching. As is the case 
with most insects that oviposit in the living parts of plants, the eggs 
of the Cicada receive a certain nourishment from the plant and 
actually increase in size before hatching, 
by absorption of the juices from the 
adjacent plant cells. 

Discussing the development of the fig. 45.-Egg of periodical cicada, much 

embryo^ Doctor Potter says that on the enlarged, showing young about to be 
fifteenth day a change in color in the egg '^^^"^«^- ^^"'^"^'^ illustration.) 
may be noted, and from this time on there is a gradual increase in 
size, the embryo slowly assuming form — the eye becoming especially 
prominent some ten days before hatching (fig. 45). 

The larval Cicada makes its escape by rupturing the eggshell over 
the back, from the upper end downward about halfway, by muscular 
movements, accompanied with an inflation of the head and forward 
parts of the body. The rupture in the shell once made, the larva 
works its way out by twistings and contortions until the tip of its 
body only remains in the egg slit of the shell. The entire insect, how- 
ever, is still inclosed in an extremely delicate and almost invisible 
membrane (amnion), and after resting a short time the violent move- 
ments are again resumed, and by wriggling, twisting, and inflating its 
head, thorax, and anterior parts the thin enveloping skin is burst open, 
and by gradual efforts^ coupled with contractions and expansions of the 
body, the larva draws itself out, leaving the thin white skin held in the 
tip of the eggshell. The larvse nearest the opening come out first, 
the others following in regular order, each usually pushing out the 
abandoned eggshell of the preceding one, though commonly several 
eggshells remain attached to the loose woody fibers of the egg nest. 


Almost at the moment that it becomes free, the larva begins to 
run actively about with the quick motions of an ant, but soon goes 
to the side of the limb, loosens its hold, and deliberately falls to the 
ground, its specific gravity being so slight that it passes through the 
air as gently as a feather and receives no injury. The peculiar 
instinct which impels this newly hatched larva to thus precipitate 
itself into space without the least knowledge of the distance to the 
ground or the result of its venture has been often commented upon, 
but is not more remarkable than other features in the life history of 
this species. 

On coming to the earth the larva immediately penetrates it, usually 
entering at a crack or fissure, or at the base of some herbaceous plant, 
and begins the long period of its subterranean life. 

The newly hatched larva (fig. 46) is about one-sixteenth of an inch 
long and differs considerably in general form from the later larval 
stages, wliile at the same time presenting the general structural char- 
acteristics shown in the latter. It has, for example, a much longer 

and distinctly eight-jointed antenna, 
and the head is longer in proportion 
to the body. It is yellowish white in 
general color, except the eyes and the 
claws of the anterior legs, which are 

Fig. 46.— Newly hatched larva, greatly reddish. It is SparScly COVCrcd with 
enlarged. (After Riley.) ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ j^ ^^^^^ j^ .^ ^^.^^ ^j^^_ 

gate and subcylindrical, and it is particularly notable for its very 
prominent front legs. 


The life and habits of the periodical Cicada above ground, which 
have so far only been discussed, are open to easy study and have been 
fairly well understood, certainly since the time of Ilildreth, Potter, and 
Smith ; but from the time of the disappearance of the young larva be- 
neath the soil and thereafter, throughout its long hypogeal existence, 
observations are difficult and with the earlier observers were limited to 
the occasional or accidental unearthing of specimens, and no consecutive 
series of observations of a definite brood or generation was attempted. 
The proof for the 17-year or 13-year period for the development of 
the Cicada was, therefore, based solely on chronological records, but 
so noteworthy were the recurrences of the important broods and so 
full and complete were the records, some broods having been regularly 
recorded on the occasion of each visit for nearly two hundred years, 
that there was no possibility of doubting the accuracy of the time 
periods from such records alone ; nevertheless, this unusual feature in 



the life of the Cicada always arouses skepticism in the minds of persons 
who have not given the matter study and have not examined the 
historical records. To silence such objectors, rather than because of 
the need of experimental proof, Professor Riley was for many years 
interested in demonstrating by actual rearing experiments the period 
of underground development of this insect; in other words, to follow 
a particular generation through its subterranean life of seventeen or 
thirteen years, as the case might be, watching its development and 
preserving examples of the different stages. 

The great difficulty of conducting to a successful termination experi- 
ments of this sort will be appreciated when the long period over which 
the experiments must necessarily extend is remembered. The extreme 
delicacy and softness of the larvae themselves, especially in the first 
years of their existence, introduces an additional difficulty, as the 
sUghtest touch or pressure injures or crushes them and renders them 
unrecognizable. It is therefore often difficult to find them, even when 
the soil is very thickly tenanted. 

The difficulty of carrying out breeding experiments with the Cicada 
under any but natural conditions is illustrated by various efforts in this 
direction undertaken by this Bureau. In one instance a number of 
newly hatched Cicada larvee were allowed to penetrate the soil about a 
potted oak tree of small size. None of these larvae survived for a 
single year. In another instance the larvse were allowed to penetrate 
the soil in large breeding tanks, each containing young trees, the tanks 
being planted out of doors in the soil. These were left undisturbed for 
a number of years, and although the conditions were seemingly very 
favorable for a successful outcome, when an examination was finally 
made, no traces of the larvae were found. 

The earliest systematic attempts to follow the development of the 
Cicada were made in the field in Missouri by Professor Riley, and 
subsequently continued under the latter's direction by Mr. J. G. Bar- 
low, an agent of the Bureau. They consisted in making diggings 
from year to year under trees which were known to have been thickly 
stocked with eggs. The first records approaching in any way to 
completeness were obtained with the 13-year Brood XIX, beginning 
with its appearance in 1881. Observations on this brood were con- 
tinued by Mr. Barlow at Cadet, Mo., with a fair degree of regularity 
until July, 1891, when they unfortunately terminated. 

During the ten years over which these observations extended the 
insect had developed through all four larval stages and was ready to 
enter the first pupal stage. The first molt occurred after a period of 
from one year to eighteen months, the second molt after an addi- 
tional period of two years, the third molt after an additional period 
of three years, and the fourth molt after an additional period of 
31117— No. 71—07 8 


three or four years, leaving in this 13-year brood three or four years 
more for the pupal stages. 

A much more careful series of experiments was instituted in con- 
nection with the 17-year Brood X, beginning with its last appearance 
in 1885. At the time that the eggs of the 13-year Brood XXIII were 
being distributed to various points in the North, in order to determine 
the eflFect of the temperature and climate (see pp. 18-20), quantities 
of egg-laden twigs of the 17-year brood noted, collected in Virginia, 
were distributed under certain linden and oak trees on the grounds 
of the Department of Agriculture at Washington, D. C. Larvae 
came from these twigs in some numbers and went into the soil imder 
the trees, but not in such abundance as could have been wished for 
the successful outcome of the experiment. This brood was followed 
in its underground life from 1885 to 1896, at which time the speci- 
mens had become so rare that extensive digging resulted in the dis- 
covery of very few individuals, and further search was abandoned. 
With this brood the first molt occurred after one year, the second 
molt two years later, the third molt three or four years later, and the 
fourth molt after an additional three or four years, thus occupying 
upward of ten years with the four larval changes and bringing the 
insect into the last larval stage with some six or seven years for the 
subsequent larval and pupal life. If any adults emerged at the end 
of the 17-year period in 1902 they were not observed. 


A much more promising experiment, because of more abundant 
material, was instituted on the Department groimds in 1889 with the 
17-year race which appeared in that year and which had its return 
appearance during May and Jime of last summer (1906). This brood 
is practically unrepresented in the District of Columbia, and did not 
occur at all on the Department grounds. A very large quantity of 
egg-infested twigs was obtained from North Carolina, Long Island, 
Kentucky, and Ohio, several cartloads altogether, and were distrib- 
uted under oak and other trees on the groimds of the Department of 
Agriculture. The eggs in most instances were hatching when received 
and were placed imder the trees in the very best condition for the 
larvae to enter the soil, and many thousands, probably hundreds of 
thousands, of larvae actually went into the soil under these trees. This 
experiment was made during the first year of the writer's connection 
with the Biu'eau of Entomology, and the later examinations were 
made chiefly under his direction. Three years after the planting the 
soil under the trees where the egg-bearing twigs had been distributed 

o The records of the plantings on the Department grounds of the eggs of Brood X 
in 1885 and Brood XIV in 1889 are given in Appendix B, of Bui. 14, 


was found to be thickly filled with larvae, so much so that a single 
spadeful of earth would often turn up half a dozen or more. In the 
spring of 1897 the larvse had reached the fourth stage and were still 
very abundant in the soil. Examinations were made from time to 
time showing these larvae to be still present in the soil about the trees 
where the eggs had been distributed, going through the slow process 
of growth and transformation which has been described elsewhere. 
That a successful outcome was sure to be had in this experiment was 
demonstrated in the early spring of 1906, the year for the appearance 
of this brood, the ground about the planted trees exhibiting many of 
the exit holes of the insects which are made to the siu^ace long before 
the insect emerges. These holes under certain trees were so numerous 
as to indicate the emergence of thousands of cicadas. Under one tree 
a count and estimate were made of more than five thousand openings, 
and under other trees the openings ranged from a few hundred to from 
one to three thousand. The actual emergence took place between 
May 14 and 21. The writer visited the grove on two evenings and 
witnessed the issuance of numbers of cicadas and collected some 
specimens. In spite, however, of the considerable munber of cicadas 
which actually emerged, none was seen on the trees during the days 
and weeks following emergence. Each morning about the planted 
trees would be found a considerable group of blackbirds {QuisccHus 
quiscvla)j which evidently had been feasting on the newly-issued 
cicadas. The cast pupal shells were numerous on the trunks of the 
trees and especially on the foliage, and also on the ground, but scarcely 
a single Cicada escaped the sharp eyes of these birds, and the charac- 
teristic song was not heard during June in this grove, although thou- 
sands of adults had come forth. 

At none of the examinations were Cicadas found of this brood under 
any of the trees except where eggs had been distributed, and no 
emergence holes appeared under other trees. The record from the 
planting to the emergence of this insect is therefore complete, and 
gives the demonstration by actual transfer and breeding record of the 
long period of the 17-year brood, a demonstration which, as indicated 
at the outset, was entirely unnecessary to show the correctness of this 
extraordinary hypogeal term. 

The absolute failure of these insects to establish themselves when 
planted in such enormous numbers, and even when the underground 
period had been successfully passed, owing to the relentless onslaught 
of birds, is a striking illustration of what is happening every year 
with the different broods in nature, especially in thinly forested 
regions, and accounts for their great reduction in numbers and the 
practical disappearance of many local swarms formerly abundant. 
It also shows that there may be emergences in considerable numbers 


without their being reported, unless some observer chances on a pupal 
shell or notes the exit holes in the ground about the trees; hence 
the slight value of a negative report as opposed to a positive one. 


A careful study of the material collected in the course of the experi- 
ments described in the last section demonstrates the interesting fact 
that this species, in spite of its very long period of growth, presents 
the same number of adolescent stages as is found in insects which go 
through their entire development within a single year or even of the 
more rapidly multiplying species, which have many annual genera- 
tions. But six distinct stages are found, four of which belong to the 
larval condition and two to the pupal. In other words, the larval 
and pupal changes in the periodical Cicada are normal and are not 
increased by its long preparatory existence. 

It has been inferred hitherto, and notably by Professor Riley, that 
owing to the continual use of the claws in burrowing, this species found 
it necessary to shed its skin and undergo a molting once or twice a 
year, and instead of the normal number of changes or molts there 
were probably from twenty-five to thirty. An examination of types 
of the different larval stages which Professor Riley had provisionally 
separated demonstrates that the differences on which these supposed 
stages were based are either individual and exceptional or due to the 
difference of age within the same stage, and that as far as structure 
and size of the hard parts of the larva and pupa are concerned the 
normal number of stages only is repi'esented in this species. 

For the separation of these different stages of growth useful char- 
acters are found in the size and structure of the legs, and especially of 
the anterior pair, in the antennse, and in the development of the w4ng 
sheaths. It is the rule with insects that with each molt there is a 
decided increase in the size of the head and hard parts generally, and 
with the periodical Cicada especially it is also very doubtful if there 
is ever a molt without a decided change of the sort indicated. Its life 
beneath the ground in its moist cell over a rootlet is a very quiet one and 
free from any of the wearing action of rain or the drying of the outer 
air, so that the need of a molting or change of skin would apparently be 
much less than that in an exposed or much more active insect. It prob- 
ably also very rarely has occasion to burrow to any considerable extent 
and probably often remains for years in the same cell, which it enlarges 
from time to time without change of location. For these reasons the 
writer is inclined to believe that moltings only occur when change of 
form becomes necessary by the increased size of the insect, and this 
seems to be borne out by definite structural peculiarities, which easily 
permit us to recognize the different stages or determine the age of any 
larva within ^a year or two. The larva of a particular molt or stage 


of growth will vary considerably in size of the body and the softer 
parts, representing perhaps a difference in age in some cases of one 
or two years, but the hard parts will present a very uniform size and 

. The peculiar structure of the enlarged anterior legs furnishes per- 
haps the best means of distinguishing the adolescent stages of this 
species from other cicadas and the modification which these limbs 
undergo with the different molts the best means of determining the 
age of the larvae. The peculiarities of the anterior legs consist in the 
enormous enlargement of the femora and tibiae and their development 
into structures which resemble somewhat the cutting mandibles of 
biting insects or recall the fossorial forelegs of the mole cricket. The 
peculiar structiu^e of these legs is in fact especially designed for dig- 
ging, tearing, and transporting earth in the course of the insect's sub- 
terranean life. As already indicated, the amount of burrowing in 
the early stages is not necessarily very great in any one year, but dur- 
ing the entire seventeen years conditions may occasionally arise which 
will demand a considerable activity on the part of the young Cicada. 

The details of the structure of the front legs, which are given in the 
technical description of this species, are quite characteristic and 
diverge notably from the similar parts of other species. The anterior 
tarsus of the periodical Cicada exhibits also a rather peculiar meta- 
morphosis during th/e adolescent life of the species. In other words, 
during the first larval stage and in the pupal stage it is similar to the 
other tarsi but considerably longer, being attached to the inner side 
of the greatly enlarged tibia and at a considerable distance from the 
clawlike tip of the latter. The fore tarsi are of service to the young 
larva in walking and climbing and in the same way to the pupa after 
its emergence from the soil, facilitating its climbing trees or other 
objects; in other words, covering the periods between the hatching 
and entering the soil and between the emergence of the pupa and the 
disclosure of the imago. During its long subterranean life, however, 
these long, slender tarsi, being distinctly in the way in digging in the 
earth and of no service, become rudimentary with the first molt and 
nearly disappear in the subsequent larval stage. They reappear in 
the first pupal stage, but in this and the subsequent pupal stage, 
while the insect is still below the soil, they are folded back along the 
tibisp, so as to be practically functionless (see fig. 51), and are only 
unfolded and brought into service after the pupa has emerged from 
the ground. 

The more detailed description of the different stages which follows 
will facilitate the easy recognition of any particular stage. The chief 
points to be considered in determining both the age of the larva and 
whether or not it belongs to the periodical species are the measure- 
ments of the corresponding parts of the legs and antennae, but per- 

Ilfffsflf ___ 

peculiar comb-like 

■ont femora, together 

J^vering of the body and 


(fig. 47,0) is about 1.8 

-%¥^)^^tt m^> ^^^ abdomen, is rather 


>-^ .throughout, presenting, 
>r0i(|||fter larval stages. The 
~ plothed with numerous 
long hairs. The gen- 
_ ___ is creamy white, with 

I * I Htai!!^, deep red, almost black, 
ISi^gjUfiFt. The antennae, beak, 
HBj^ JJire, relatively with other 
I ^J^T^i'ry large in comparison 
^-"*'^^*^ size of the body. The 
legs are developed in 
f,as in the later stages, 
l^u^E^I lacking the femoral 
'"""""* organ which begins in 
id stage and the minute 
ibapical tooth on the tibia 
^ears in the fourth st^e. 
,erior tibite are also 
ider and the mandible- 
more sharply pointed. 
,____„_ of stiff hairs for retain- 
-SfttgilQSpai'th excavated in bur- 
prominent in the 
i, is but sparsely rep- 
The anterior tarsus 
Eed considerably within 
le latter, and is armed 
lurved claws, similar to 
basal joint of the two- 
with difficulty detected, 
_ ; in later larval develop- 
_ l^all the subsequent larval 

^il&t^BaT^tinguishing this species 
a .«>..«... '-en, which has an addi- 
inent antennal tubercle 
i*)er which I have hitherto 
and a little shorter than 


the second, the two following are subequal and shorter than the first, 
the fifth is shorter than the fourth, and the sixth and seventh are 
subequal and shorter than the fifth, the last tapering regularly from 
the apex, which is armed with curved spines, one long and one short. 
The terminal three joints form something of a club tip. During this 
stage the larva increases in length to more than 3 mm. and the abdo- 
men swells and becomes more robust. The length of the hard chiti- 
nous parts remain, however, unchanged, as follows: Anterior femora, 
0.27 mm.; anterior tibise, 0.30 mm.; hind tibiae, 0.33 mm. 

This stage lasts more than a year, the first molt usually occurring 
during the second year after hatching. (See fig. 47.) 

Second larval stooge, — The average length of the larva in this stage is 
about 4 mm. The more homy parts now measure: Anterior femora, 
0.50 mm.; anterior tibiae, 0.55 mm.; hind tibiae, 0.80 mm. The 
general appearance is unchanged from the later development in the 
preceding stage. The eye-spots are still present, though reduced. 
The imder surface of the head is armed with some rather long hairs, 
and a very regular row of minute spines occurs on the anterior face 
of the hind and the middle femora. 
The prominent apical tibial spur of 
the middle and the hind pair ap- 
pears with this molt, being previ- 
ously represented, if at all, by a sim- 
ple spine. The third joint of the 

now distinctly elbowed antennae is Fig. 48.— second larval stage: o, anterior leg, 
1 .-I 1 1 ji ji outer face; 6, same, inner face. (Author's 

as long as the second, and the three illustration.) 
terminal joints are rather more com- 
pressed into a club-like tip than in the first stage. The chief charac- 
teristics of this second stage, however, are in the anterior legs (fig. 
48). The femora now possess a rudimentary comb of three teeth, the 
upper tooth being very broad and projecting beyond the two suc- 
ceeding sharp ones, of which the lower is the larger. The central 
tooth of the femora, which was rather minute, or, more properly, a 
mere spine in the first stage, is now very much larger and broadened 
at the base into a prominent triangular projection. The tarsus is 
reduced to a homy rudiment about three times as long as wide, and 
is closely applied to the inner surface of the tibial '^jaw'^ which 
extends twice the length of the tarsus beyond the latter. 

This stage, as already stated, is assumed during the first two or 
three months of the second year of the insect's existence and lasts 
nearly two years. 

Third larval stage. — Length, 6 to 8 mm. ; anterior femora, 1.20 mm. ; 
anterior tibiae, 1.35 mm.; hind tibiae, 1.85 mm. Eye-spots still more 
reduced; numerous parallel rows of short hairs on the head are notice- 

n^i^W^^'l^J/hkiQg four in all, couut- 
^'- ."p. 5'S*2*mg the blunt upper 

* S'S^H'^S^' ^^^ ^^' *^'' "^^ *"" 

glU^^'-Bf W.^^ll^'tennal joints decrease 

^i1 C^nBh'^3&^^'9^ilS.^ length from the 
^i[W^i^!l>I^^HlH^^»l ^ ^^e terminal, 
liB ^^fi^fi£A|2Htw*the basal two and the 
st»is si^ IP sititJ!^ ?P. •• ~ ii^^tiSJ Sf S*^"""^*! *'**^ being, 
?JyJi^P^W^F^^FB'tlt^jl^'S5*ll'''^''B''^*^P'^^'^^^- '^^ nearly 
■g^B ^^y'*^~''g%'3'Sigi7^S^ual length, respec- 

«r T ft 5 C "* n ii^i?#8fi^SI Ii » 

"w'E ■ • ■ :irjt;a:;«;a:3 

• <«*• i-Vf " " 

minute pads. Sexual 
of the fourth year of its 
^ia^l.; anterior femora, 2.40 





"•« M.^'-:i-l i.i,fl.«.i^ 

^bSSr^Sn^-l^SoSStEe: a, full grovn larva, muchep- 
_..jgin^ri«|SB«S&i>S£laM»lcDmb: c, anterior teg, outei lace; 
^•jABiii^SuJSla^i^Sithor'B lUuslratlon.) 

■^-^ n %n Zi 'Sf^v^'Si^f^/v'^^S^i more prominent than 
; V -■'" * • K®<fB^lSi^Srof the eighth yesr ot its 

t-i» • - 1 ■ Si "— -'-^^^^■"' — 

^•or four years. 



First pupal stage, — ^Length in the early condition of this stage about 
17 mm.; anterior femora, 3.30 mm.; anterior tibiae, 3.60 mm.; hind 
tibiae, 5.80 mm.; width of head, 6 mm. Eye-spots entbely wanting; 
eye prominences well developed, as in later pupal stages. Wing cases 
extend to the tip of the third segment. Third antennal joint one- 
third longer than second, fourth as long as second, others decreasing 
in length' The anterior' tarsi reappear'perfectly developed, and Je 
nearly as long as the tibiae, and are folded along the mner face of the 
latter; the first joint is very minute, and the second or last very long — 
longer than the middle or posterior pairs — and armed with two curved 
claws at the tip, of which one is rather longer than the other. Femoral 
comb with an additional tooth, a very minute one being distinctly 
separated from the large blunt 
upper tooth. The anterior 
tibiae have within the large 
blunt subapical tooth, which 
has occurred all along hitherto, 
two minute saw-teeth instead 
of the one present in the pre- 
ceding stage (fig. 51). The 
hairs of the legs and body are 
arranged as hitherto, but are 
rather more numerous and 
longer, and this is particularly 
true of the anterior limbs. 
The sexual characters which 
have been foreshadowed in the 
two later larval stages are now 
distinctly defined. 

Second pupal stage, — This 

stage does not present any fig. si.— First pupal stage :o, anterior leg, inner face, 

differences from the last except 
in the greater size of the speci- 
mens, which is noticeable in the relative dimensions of the parts 
hitherto measured for comparison. The length of the adult pupa 
varies from 27 mm. in the case of the males to about 35 mm. in the 
case of the larger females. The adult pupa of the male presents the 
following length of the parts referred to: Anterior femora, 3.80 mm.; 
anterior tibiae, 4.30 mm.; hind tibiae, 6.70 mm.; width of head, 6.70 
mm. In the case of the female: Anterior femora, 4.20 mm.; anterior 
tibiae, 5 mm.; hind tibiae, 7.50 mm.; width of head, 7.50 mm. The 
anterior tarsus in all unearthed specimens is folded closely back 
against the face of the tibia, but in all aerial specimens is unfolded 
and projects forward to be of service in climbing. 

showing tarsus bent back against the tibia; b, 
same, outer face. (Author's illustration.) 



During its long life beneath the soil, in its smarll moist oval cell, 
which at first is not larger than a "birdshot/' but is gradually enlarged 
to accommodate the slowly-increasing size of the inmate, little oppor- 
tunity is afforded for much variation in mode of existence and habits. 
The interesting features to be considered are the feeding and burrow- 
ing habits, which together comprise the principal activities of its sub- 
terranean existence. 


The food taken by this insect beneath the soil is necessarily fluid, as 
is also the case with the perfect insect, as well as with all other insects 
of the order Hemiptera. That the Cicada should obtain its nourish- 
ment in a manner different from the other members of its order would 
not be anticipated, but, nevertheless, a good deal of difference of 
opinion has been expressed as to the nature of the food of this insect 
in its subterranean life, as also its method of feeding. Both Professor 
Potter and Doctor Smith were of the opinion that the insect in its 
underground life obtained its nourishment from the surface moisture 
of the roots of plants through capillary hairs at the tip of the pro- 
boscis — a curious misapprehension, as th^ hairs mentioned arise from 
the sheaths, and have no connection with the true piercing and sucking 
setae. Professor Potter expresses himself on this subject as follows: 

In all places they are found attached to the tender fibrils of plants. When they 
are disturbed or driven from them they seek for others the moment they are at liberty. 
This is their only aliment, not the substance of the roots of the plants, which they can 
not divide and comminute without teeth or jaws to use them, but the mere aerial 
exhalation from their surface. This well-established fact would seem to account for 
the slowness of their growth, and furnishes a reason for so long a subterraneous residence. 

This absurd view of the method of nourishment of the larva and 
pupa is on a par also with the belief of the same authors, reviving the 
statement of Aristotle, that the adult insect subsists on "the dewy 
exhalation of vegetable barks, '^ which was supposed to be swept up by 
a brush of hairs on the tip of the proboscis. Doctor Smith claims a 
basis for this theory of the feeding habits in personal observation, and 
it has been supposed by others to be supported by the well-known 
fact that the Cicada will occasionally issue from the ground that has 
been practically cleared of timber and under cultivation for a number 
of years, and that other species are known to issue from the prairies. 
These facts lose much of their significance when it is remembered that 
any vegetation, even annual, as of farm crops, would supply ample 
root growth for the Cicada larva during the growing period of summer, 
and in the colder months they undoubtedly lie dormant in their earthen 


Perhaps the first writer to point out and demonstrate the true 
method of feeding of the larva and pupa of this iixsect in their under- 
ground existence was Miss Morris, of Germantown, Pa. That the 
Cicada larvsB and pupse pierce small roots with their sucking beaks 
and feed on the juices of the plant, as do other plant-feeding hemip- 
terous insects, as their normal, if not their sole method of subsisting 
was fully proved by her investigation, and has been confirmed repeat- 
edly in the diggings made by the writer, and there can no longer be 
any possibility of doubt in the matter. In practically every case, in 
the writer's experience, where the cell in which the larva rested was 
taken out in condition for examination a small root, one-sixteenth to 
three-sixteenths inch in diameter, was found to border usually the 
upper end of the cell, and in several instances larvae were found with 
their beaks so securely embedded in the root that they were not easily 
loosened. In other instances the roots showed, by the slight swell- 
ing and reddish discoloration beneath the bark, unmistakable signs of 
having been punctured. 

The root-feeding habit can be best witnessed in light, rich soils, and 
in the plantings of the brood of 1889 under oak trees on the Depart- 
ment grounds the soil beneath these trees was so thickly inhabited 
that between the depths of 6 and 12 inches every spadeful of earth 
would throw out numbers of the larvae, and a most excellent opportu- 
nity was afforded for the study of their habits. In hard, packed 
soils, perhaps scantily supplied with roots, the difficulty of getting out 
the cells in perfect condition is such that one might easily be led into 
error, and the comparative rarity of the larvae in such soils adds fur- 
ther to the difficulty of determining their feeding habits. 

It is for this reason, I have no doubt, that the opinion has obtained 
in some quarters that the larvae subsist not on the roots of plants, but 
on the nourishment obtained from the surface moisture of the roots, 
or the general moisture of the earth, which might be supposed to 
contain more or less nutrient material arising from the decomposition 
of the vegetable matter. That the moisture of the surrounding soil 
may, and doubtless does; supply the very delicate, thin-skinned larvae 
and pupae with a certain amount of liquid by absorption through the 
skin may be admitted, and in fact when the larvae are taken from 
their natural surroundings and exposed to the air they very rapidly 
dry and shrivel. Larvae are doubtless occasionally found in cells 
away from roots, and this may be explained by the fact of their being 
at that time either undergoing one of their long resting or hibernating 
periods, which may be of frequent occurrence in such an extremely 
long-lived species, or they may be burrowing in search of roots on 
which to subsist. 



There has been great difference of opinion as to the depth beneath 
the soil reached by the larvae and pupae. In all of the extensive 
excavations which have been made on the Department grounds in 
following the results of the experimental plantings, specimens have 
rarely been found at a greater depth than 2 feet below the surface and 
usually between 6 and 12 inches, especially in the first years of the life 
of the insect. This experience is corroborated by the examinations 
made by Professor Riley in Missouri, and is fully confirmed by the 
interesting manuscript notes left on this subject by Doctor Smith, 
which are here reproduced: 

The depth in the earth to which it descends depends upon that of the vegetable 
soil, and its location is at the bottom of the soil, except perhaps in some of the deep 
soils of the West and the alluvial soils, where the depth of its descent is probably- 
only sufficient to protect it against the inclemency of the weather. This is generally 
from 12 to 18 inches and sometimes 2 feet. It never changes its locality from the 
time it enters the earth till it emerges. The cells in which they shut themselves up 
are, inside, well finished and smooth, of a sufficient size to acconunodate them; but 
outside they are mere lumps of clay and afford by their appearance no clew to their 
internal character. It is this fact that has caused all the doubt and mystery about 
their place of residence and habits during their long continuance in the earth. A 
gentleman in the winter of 1850-51 was excavating on the side of a low hill for the 
purpose of building a wall on West Baltimore street. The excavation was about 150 
yards long and 6 to 18 feet deep to the level of the paved street. This hill had been 
covered in former years with trees and shrubbery, and had been one of the fields of 
observation in 1834. I watched this excavation daily and found the cells of the 
locusts thrown down in the greatest abundance. The lumps of earth containing 
the cells would roll down the heaps of earth just as others did, affording not the 
slightest indication of their internal contents. But as the pick or the spade of the 
workmen struck a cell in its place in the banks it readily broke open and the larva 
was exposed. When the excavation was completed the observer standing in the 
street had a fine view of the broken cells in the bank. From one end of the bank 
to the other the cells were plainly visible, appearing like small augur holes, and all in 
a regular stratum of earth about 18 inches below the surface of the earth, from 2 to 4 
or 5 inches apart, and none more than 1 or 2 inches higher or lower than the others. 
The internal size of the cells was from IJ to 2 inches long and about three-fourths of 
an inch wide, forming an oblong cavity very smooth in its walls. The particles of 
earth of which the cells were composed had evidently been agglutinated together 
by some viscid fluid secreted by the insect. This is their habitation during the whole 
seventeen years, or until they prepare for their ascent. 

In the face of the testimony given above there are records also by 
apparently trustworthy observers which seem to indicate that the 
larvae are capable of going to much greater depths. An instance of 
this sort is reported by Mr. Sadorus, of Port Byron, 111., who built a 
house in 1853 and found that they came up in his cellar in 1854. 
Others have reported finding them at a depth of 10 feet or even more 
below the surface. A rather remarkable instance is recorded by Mr. 
Henry C. Suavely, of Lebanon, Pa., in which the Cicada pupae are 
reported to have worked their way through a hard mass of cinders 
about 6 feet in thickness, which had been firmly compacted. 


It is difficult to say how many of these reported occurrences at 
unusual depths are due to an unobserved tumbling of specimens from 
higher levels, but where the insects have been observed to issue through 
the bottom of cellars or similar situations the information would seem 
to be reliable. The fact remains, however, that all of the extensive 
diggings in the investigation of the early history of this insect here in 
Washington and elsewhere have confirmed the statements of Doctor 
Smith; in other words, the insects have always been found, as stated, 
within 2 feet of the surface and in greatest numbers between the 
depths of 8 and 18 inches. 

A curious featiu'e in connection with the underground life of this 
insect is its apparent ability to siu'vive without injury in soil which 
may have been flooded for a considerable period. Doctor Smith 
records a case of this kind where a gentleman in Louisiana in January, 
1818, built a milldam, thus overflowing some land. In March of the 
following year the water was drawn off and ^'in removing a hard bed 
of pipe clay that had been covered with water all of this time some 6 
feet deep the locusts were found in a fine, healthy state, ready to make 
their appearance above ground, that being the year of their regular 
appearance." Another case almost exactly similar is reported by 
Mr. Barlow. In this instance the building of a dam resulted in the 
submerging of the ground about an oak tree during several months 
of every summer, ultimately resulting in the death of the tree. This 
went on for several years, until the dam was washed away by a 
freshet, when digging beneath the tree led to the discovery of the 
Cicada larvae in apparently healthy condition from 12 to 18 inches 
below the natural surface of the ground. In both of these instances 
the ground may have been nearly impervious, so that the water did 
not reach the insects nor entirely kill all of the root growth in the 
submerged soil. 


The actions of the Cicada beneath the soil are not readily investi- 
gated, the newly hatched and more active individuals disappearing 
rather rapidly and seeming to be quite at home in the earth, as their 
natural element. The method of burrowing of the larger and partly 
grown specimens, as witnessed in captivity under fairly natural condi- 
tions, is, as has been described in the manuscript notes of the Bureau, 
as follows: The larva scratches away the walls of its cell with the 
femoral and tibial claws, grasping and tearing the earth and small 
stones just as one would do with the hands, bracing itself against the 
sides of its cell mainly by its hind and middle legs, the former in their 
natural position and the latter stretched out over the back. If it is 
rising, so that the earth removed naturally falls to the lower end of 
the burrow, it simply presses the detached portions on all sides, and 


especially on the end of the cavity, by means of its abdomen and 
middle and hind legs. If the direction of the larva, however, is down- 
ward, the loose soil has to be gathered and pressed against the upper 
end of the cavity, which is accomplished by making the soil into little 
pellets by means particularly of the front femora and placing these 
pellets on the clypeal part of the head, carrying them upward and 
pressing them firmly against the top of the cavity. The stiff hairs 
that cover the head and border the inner side of the fore tibiae and 
femora assist very materially in securing the earth while it is being 

From time to time the burrowing insect rests and cleans the 
adhering earth from its forelegs very much as a cat washes its face 
with its paws. The large, strong forelegs are moved over the rough- 
ened front of the head, the stiff hairs springing from the latter acting 
like a comb or brush to free the spines of adhering earth. 


During its underground life the Cicada has been charged with 
damaging, and even killing, fruit trees. At first thought this is not 
an unnatural inference when one remembers the immense numbers in 
which the insect often occurs. The most specific charge brought 
against them in this particular is the account published by Miss 
Morris in 1846." Miss Morris having suspected for a number of years 
that the failure of certain fruit trees over 20 years old was mainly due 
to the ravages of the larvae of the periodical Cicada, had an examina- 
tion made of one of them, a pear tree that had been declining for a 
number of years without apparent cause. She says: 

Agreeably to my expectation I found the larvae of the Cicada in countless numbers 
clinging to the roots of the tree, with their suckers piercing the bark and so deeply 
and firmly placed that they remained hanging for a half an hour after being removed 
from the earth. . From a root a yard long and about an inch in diameter I gathered 
23 larvae; they were of various sizes, from a quarter of an inch to an inch in length. 
They were on all the roots that grew deeper than 6 inches below the surface. The 
roots were unhealthy, and bore the appearance of external injury from small 
punctures. On removing the outer coat of bark this appearance increased, leaving 
no doubt as to the cause of the disease. 

In this particular instance there is some reason for believing that 
the damage to the tree had been caused by the larvae. The fact 
remains, however, that no damage has ever been detected in forests, 
where the Cicada emerges in countless myriads, the trees presenting 
as vigorous and robust a condition as in other districts where rio 
cicadas occur, and this is true also of old original trees and planted 
trees in parks or private grounds. In orchards also where the insects 
have been so abundant that the ground was almo'st honeycombed after 

oProc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., December, 1846 (1848), vol. 3, p. 133. 


their emergence the trees themselves exhibited a good state of vigor 
and an inspection of the roots revealed no material injury save some 
small swellings or callosities with slight discoloration which might 
have resulted from the punctm-es. 

The underground development of the Cicada is so very slow, thirteen 
or seventeen years being occupied in attaining a size which with other 
species is achieved in as many days or weeks, that the very slow 
absorption of nutriment from the roots can scarcely have any effect 
on them, and the only injury, and this is very slight, is probably due 
to a poisoning of the roots, perhaps by the beak of the insect, as 
indicated by the slight discoloration of the cambium at the point of 
puncture. Callosities and other irregularities are, however, rare, 
and have never been observed by the writer. Very often also there 
are, undoubtedly, long periods of rest or dormancy, during which no 
food at all is taken. 

Referring to the injury noted by Miss Morris, it is a well-known 
fact that fruit trees have a natiu*al term of life, and after twenty years 
they are very apt to show weakness and loss of vigor, and cease to be 
profitable. It is possible, therefore, that this is the true explanation 
of the condition of the trees noted by her rather than that it was due 
to the presence of the larvae of the Cicada. 


The fact that the periodical Cicada appears above ground so rarely 
prevents its having any peculiar or specific parasitic or natm-al 
enemies. We can not conceive of any parasite breeding solely, either 
in the adult Cicada or in its eggs which could persist during the long 
period of years when no host was available. Equally remarkable 
also would be a parasitic insect the term of whose life should be so 
extended that it could live in the body of the Cicada larva during 
the years of its slow growth beneath the soil. Of the larger enemies 
of the Cicada, such as birds and mammals, the habit of feeding on 
the Cicada is necessarily acquired anew with each recurrence of a 
Cicada year. 

All these facts have a very potent influence in protecting the peri- 
odical Cicada, which, as we have aheady pointed out, is particularly 
helpless, and were it not for these natural protective influences the 
very existence of the species would probably be early brought to 
an end. 

During their subterranean existence, the larvse and pupae, when 
near the surface, are doubtless subject to the attacks of various 
predaceous coleopterous larvse, and many of them are unquestionably 
destroyed by this agency. Upon leaving the ground to transform 
they present an attractive food for many insectivorous animals, and 
the pupae and transforming adults are vigorously attacked by many 


diflFerent reptiles, mammals, and birds, and by cannibal insects, 
such as ground beetles, dragon-flies, soldier-bugs, etc., while such 
domestic animals as bogs and poultry of all kinds greedily feast upon 
them. The preference shown by hogs running wild in woods for the 
Cicada is especially marked, and we have elsewhere commented on 
the fact of their rooting up the ground to get the pupae in April and 
May, before the cicadas have appeared at the surface of the ground 
for transformation. The birds are, perhaps, the most efficient 
destroyers of the Cicada, and, as we have already noted, the English 
sparrow is -particularly destructive to them in and near cities, and, 
indeed, bids fair to completely exterminate them in such locations." 

In the perfect state they are attacked by at least one parasitic fly 
(Tachina sp.), which lives internally in the body of its host. One of 
the large digger wasps, to be later described, also preys upon the 
adult, provisioning its larval galleries with the stung and dormant 
cicadas. The Cicada is also attacked by a fungous disease, some- 
times so abundantly as ultimately to destroy most of the male and 
many of the female insects. 

In the egg state the Cicada has many very effective enemies, com- 
prising mainly parasitic flies belonging to the orders Hymenoptera 
and Diptera, and also various predaceous insects belonging to the 
orders Hemiptera, Neuroptera, and Coleoptera. A number of well- 
known predaceous mites, and other mites whose habits seem to be 
predaceous in this particular, are also found associated with the eggs 
of the Cicada under such circumstances as to leave little doubt of their 
feeding upon the eggs. All of these insect and mite enemies of the 
Cicada are more or less general feeders, and are simply attracted in 
numbers to the Cicada, and especially to the eggs in the case of the 
egg parasites, on account of the abundance of the food presented. In 
other words, we are furnished with a striking example merely of ready 
adaptation to new and favorable conditions. This is true also of the 
fungous disease of the Cicada, which is probably normally present in 
other species of Cicada which are annual in appearance. 

a This is well illustrated by the following experience in 1902 (Brood X) in the city 
of Washington, as recorded by the writer: " Within the city very few of the cicadas 
which came out survived more than a few hours, being quickly snapped up and 
destroyed by the English sparrow. The numbers within the city were greatly dimin- 
ished by the English sparrow at the appearance seventeen years ago, the destruction 
by this bird at that time having been noted by Professor Riley and others to be very 
considerable. The sparrows' work this year, however, was much more effective, 
the cicadas being fewer in numbers; and I doubt whether a single individual, certainly 
very few, ever reached the egg-laying period. For two or three days in the midst 
of the trees on the Museum grounds a few song notes were heard, but ceased very 
soon. In the woods in the country about the city, especially out toward Chevy 
Chase, the Cicada appeared in very considerable numbers, and here did not suffer 
very much from the attacks of birds, and for the most part went through the normal 
aerial existence successfully." (Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington, V, 1903, p. 24.) 

£'41$ Win n^>!£« oi 

S jSiSSfe natural enemies of the 

•* "*-t*.itihe eg^s in the twigs, on 

'^JJhuch leas extent, on the 

■ "* " of the insect enemies of 

2*16 given below: 

Ill ■Sill 

["been found to subsist as 
these has been reared 
identification is impos- 

'asilid, or, perhaps, more 
id by Mr. E. W. Allia at 



FIG. 62.— Cecldomylld egg parasite 
at the periodical CIctulft: Larva, 
mucli enlargeil, with anatomical 
detaUsatBide. (Original.) 

i*arvie, apparently of the 

in alder twigs. From 

ed. The larvte ranged 

general characteristics 

ii(fig. 52). 

to belong to the family 
_ icies similarly attacking 
^E^: The larvsE of these flies, 
J^^^^I^^^stage, sometimes to the 
^•^^^^ ^JS^^^P^gether in the body of a 
g&^^h^lSSt^^l^'ta&npletely eaten out. 

^ ^. ^. 'f- :^r .^. .3|. 


"Hit*' "'" 

associated with Cicada 

tie doubt but that they 

fc two species of Thrips, 

.adult stages in several 

________ nces about the eggs on 

— *S\Sil^jyy»» .Sygf they had been feeding. 
■^ '^ .■■■ J gitlBP Jnaterial that has been 

IiHrved of these Thrips is 
^Bl><>w in condition to be 
.^^MwJ^d up. Both species are 
Bii^ahlv undescribed. 

— tmk hymenopterous ene- 

Biif'l"f the Cicada comprise 

l^^'^'jguiiiber of egg parasites, 

""*■"'— ^^h are tlie more inipt>rtant 

'cies in limiting the nuni- 

■B—^-^jasp already mentioned. 

I^I^d larvBB are much sought 

Fift^J^ommented upon, Doctor 

i-A_-r- . , j^y legions of ants. 

I'pheclus carrjing a Cicada ti 

oBOBBi^ ■«•. , _^' 6£gs of the Cicada, but 

_|.t^t||u^;^^h^|b&^^> t!ie course of extensive 

_„^^^i^Ei^i^t!^Itii^ of a mymarid, a tricho- 
.g. .jp. .j^. ^. ^. ^- -♦- .5. .j(. 

1^ t»tta4mr£^' t& 


species, however, has 
'jlw^hers, and warrants a 

M this parasite by Mr. 
1868, to Doctor 
ume twigs, from 


_Jsada, from an oak which 

^^i4j)'^, after leaving the tree, 

!^hat seemed to be small 

is office for several days 

ll flies appeared again in 

. The examination of 

microscope showed that 

Hymenoptera instead 

(•first supposed. He ob- 

rvfe of the Cicada from 

consequently inferred 

of the eggs had been 

insect. He states also 

his trapped thousands 

, paint which had been 

window shutters, and 

'^^£E«^3e of August this minute 

)^<i!s|!^erywhere in force." 

ily the same insect {fig. 

-*?"M^F "*^ 3F®''™® egg-infested twigs 

" '^^i^FQ?^^^^- Pcrgande in ^'iI^inia 

ictor Howard has exam- 


hitherto recorded from 

'r the name Laihromeris 

iflBc^^^ite is evidently so short 

iKjj.jTjjj^lBi'o or three generations 

Ifigp. 102, 103. 

""'"" ~ *" ^038 !&■ '■'finS'W^ •'^ t'^^ Cicada, and this 
^g^jKf7irS*W<BfSiriff deacribed by Mr. Hart^ 
!j''fi'(M)lB|Srdlf8VHIi I occurs one of the most 



'fMiB^MtV^W^^'^M''^^ ^^^ larger digger wasp 

^^lC>^>^ti£l^^^Frday harvest fly {Cicada 
!wi'^K^(*^<Sg^I2^^i^^°'^^ and the writer, Pro- 

C^!l^%^ of this wasp 
ii:^^^jp^'^^*^;^d published i 

imlndividuals of the period- 
ical Cicada. That 
the bulk of the 
brood has disap- 
peared , however , 
before this wasp 
becomes at all 
abundant has 
been often pointed 
out and is not to 
be questioned, and 
it is well known 
that the most of 

in detail i 
a full iUus- 

S*'.*J^'I^^''>its when it preys on the 
^Bi'^'^KiffJiabits with the dog-day 
''^^•^Rl'S^hich it may store its bur- 
E(^^^^3^wasp is here reproduced, 

■"^ '■" ,^:^y curious and interesting 

L-*^».ar.,il|^ j^JIH.g^^yjp^gjj ^^j perhaps the most 
>^l|JVB'^^wrS^i| Q V <jf the different species 

""" ""' ""^$111 fact, no more curious 

_ ^iWVf MUS rif^S'tftl^e place in the insect 

H^St Hi'Clijlsraa;i|u^ wasps seizing its victim 

i^S(^BniiikBB S^OKrhich, while throwing it 

"~ " "" " ' *" ■& Recovers and suspending 

Miiot actually kill it, but 


iHarQvtt^tisfJ&^B^M^''^^*^ wasp larva. 


is often brought to the 
of the regular song 
lends in a sharp cry of 
tru^le the wasp may 

f^i - , ^ • • .s..«.^.»..«.;*' 

■^ point, the Cicada being 

i^^^g^ra*G earing the latter slowly 

^idfc ^Soften becomes necessary 

~^~ up into near-by trees, 

)S its burrow. 

^ir by the wasp, the drier 

chosen. The burrow 

Icigt^K and has three or four or 

~ i®4ength, each terminating 

l^Iese chambers is stored a 

i* in such manner as to be 

pegs of the Cicada. 

^..._ _ !:protrudes its head and 

9^34aS<li!3*t at some suture where 

>, juicy interior. The 

its life, but by means 

^^ __, thrusts its small head 

f^^ dually exhausts the soft 

^.becomes a mere broken 

lagl^WV increases in size very 

}</^JHiftining a length of 1) to 2 

■ Kltrly white in color, with 

'~l parts remarkably well 

icrior segments narrowed 

__^ ^ __ iat extension. The whole 

IShgW^^S^^lfilglf Alie egg to the full-grown 
Srgg 'V^H 'H'^Slfl ^'^i? ^fi«i period, the egg 

'l';§^Sa¥f MiWillSig a week. 

~~ }iIli9fl»h'B^»A4nie larva constructs a co- 

- — --■- — - — itgl. manner. First a cylin- 

ii^, is formed of earth with 

dense and tough pod. 

ds are capped, and the 

^insforms to a pupa in the 

^...j^S^pearance of the mature 

i'l*MU''&'^"ljS: :12"S»-"'1* «8g parasite, Oripoda 

§5By'^"B«l*»" * •J-^^tata. (Author's Ulustration). 

-- 'w^*S3^*H''^'"i*'@^ number of very curious 
>^>^J^^!&.^if®»I^^SJores until the larva has 
H^iytJl^*:^ ^i^^^*iMince they are ultimately 


Nt similar to this species, 
Q9i' nests with the larvse of 
^*in with the larger spiders. 



tgs of the Cicada or asso- 
lest a predaceous habit, 

ji - *■* Jf ^Jn^l^^^ C& iH' 'O I fljIbwB to subsist on soft- 

r ' * V • W^gM|f^*g^lg;^ost equal number, how- 

"*M8e, which, so far as the 

Ul, with few exceptions, 

(Autlmr'!! Ulus. 

i^^jf the Cicada, both those 
M^j^ous habits, were invari- 
jH^^the woody fibers, where 
^t^t that supplied by the 
,ctually observed to be 
i|fcre more or less shriveled 

^_ _...._ n examined for me by 
'S'lgiafc^icSt who has identified and 
'S'^'l!**'^^^^^^*'^^* ^^ balsam mounts, per- 
'^t^|^^^3^>u?& ^Sw^^m very careful drawings 


ho collected several of 
,y studies of the others. 
fjg^' was collected by Mr. 
,§Jch., in 1885, the balance 
district of Columbia and 
in Vii^nia in the same 

I'^'iBl^bHini^^dglfamily Oribatidie hare 
9iiklS'£^iB9i9i^J'3W "beetle mites," aris- 

w '\ra^S'B VI^^S^mI^^'^^^ minute beetles. 
H^BlSSffSyfljl^ 1(181^^ were found in the adult 
H'^MfWfBy Ww'"fl^' H" ^SS^ '^^ ^^^ Cicada, and 

■■---** ^^'^■'''^^Bfcs'— the latter being often 

S09i principal feeding stage 

Banks's determinations 
i;9*i^^ted by Mr. Pergande in 

Z^libateUa sp. (fig. 61), col- 

jMC'"®^*!!''** ^f paisrtte, Tyroglyplmi cocd- 
^S-^--^. (Author's lUuBtration.) 

i!t9^«]j|;^la^^3?a^^i£J>[umal and also vegetable 
.^. . jj. ^. ^. .jj. ,^. .jj. .jj. 


h the eggs of the Cicada 

BBiKj has a very general feed- 

l S* I flSIest ruction of the eggs or 

~ III is often a nuisance by 

Minder observation. The 

:nated female of this 

__,!d. The gravid female, 

rHt^i<^n from the tip of her 

""Ijfigure (fig. 64). 

ion, in the egg slits of- the 
' WW •iTT—'^mm'w —-".^Jfotichigan. is Tyroglyphus 
'5^'2'*^^lSrfit S'W*' Cierv., which species it 

'Hfii^^lle ol Cicada. (Autbor's 

a widely distributed one 

and often becomes very 

l^^^tiunibers on various food 

f s^^fc* of the same genus was 

i.-ffl»i tt^l jg j^qj. jjj good enough 


'iT* 2 **• -i _ ^3l"'*^"J3F^^ilP^*"S^ includes true insect 
•^ ^ * X; ^*^fi3*£J*'^*J»^E*^-to their hosts, and there 
t S."-^ ■> ^ ^I^igir^ifi'^^i&d by the Cicada eggs. 

"- *VJ* *VJ* • «^» *w* J^» 

was found by Mr, Allia 
;56). It is apparently an 
^ct from the half dozen 

for it the name 

rj|[^$*l^flS'r^98t!fl>j#>=3(yletus (fig. 67) and the 
IllleilStHtll^P^lflEEiissociated with the eggs 
'-><Si>S4W|l^^n^8li of these mites seem to 

— ^51^ **i^^'^£t**^^ enough condition to 
]&^iG9'%v!ftt.9u49ii>|i^Biiown to be camirorous, 
'm^mV'^HI'^^'^^ preying on the Cicada 

^fifi ijl lyi'MJ MtfB^iiS'Biy rply the general state- 
jlF^SHi^tBiQogVSr the Cicada bv birds, 
§aC))S4SlW^'a #' of Mr. A. W.'Butier, 

— \flB'V)IK)>H Ott Sifile attention to the natu- 
~ifi7&ta*tCiOr£^tS)^^a in 1SS5 in southeast- 

\m&l ttlfi1^k»y||*ind notes, which follow, 
n'^iliil)||h^*J|itgd and, if all the enemies 

^^^ Pii.fll^'^"('§^^"' ^"^^'^ doubtless in- 

k^ti^p^l^mtg^^t^pous birds and manunals 

. .-. •A-i-.^^w ^£ ^j^ insect. He 

Fparrow, Pa»ffr dtimeKHeiis 

enemy. Wilbin ime week 

lof the Cicada ill Urcxikville 

I doubt if a Bingle specimen 

eRgn, owing to the peraiatent 

iiiB apaiTuw. 

Mmila migraloria (Linn.); 

wi«(Ridt(.); catbird, GaU- 

'); red - headed woodpecker, 

); flicker, ColapUl auratus 

<*erylhrophthalmtii (Linn.), and 

(Linn.) were their great«8t 

ted in order that they ni^ht 

line: Brown tlmsher, 
lulo (Linn.); acarlet tanager, 
ioptila cxnika {lAnn.); worm- 
martin, Progne subia (Linn.); 
fZffyloekhla mustelitia (GmeL); 
.^^.JQinal grosbeak, Cardimdis car- 
^K4&n>; Carolina chickadee, P*7i- 
~^'^uCMiii» (Wilson); downy wood - 
Ifil flycatcher. Myiarckug crinitm 
n^Hjird, Molothrui atfr (Bodd.i; 
S(.Snl*2»-billed cuckoo, Coccyzui amer- 

^^W^Z^^i^VZ^^'*^^ '" ^^"^ extract has been 
^^M^*)uS>bi^i^ri^the Bureau of Biological Sur- 

i;^i^*»' •»• •»■ "»• 


icantis (Linn.); black-billed cuckoo, C. erythrophthalmus (Wilson); American gold- 
finch, Astragalinus tristis (Linn.); crow, Corvus brachyrhynchos Brehm, and cedar 
bird, Ampelis cedrorum (Vieill.). 

But two specimens of all the birds examined showed no evidence of cicada-eating. 
These were the cerulean warbler, Dendroica cerulea (Wilson), and the warbling vireo, 
Vireosylva gilva (Vieill.). Most birds eat only the softer parts, but some species — the 
robin, brown thrasher, towhee, and a few others — eat also the wings and legs, and 
even occasionally the head. 

I found fox squirrels, Sciurvs rufiventer Geoffroy, eating them, the young showing 
greater fondness for this food than did their parents. The ground squirrel, or chip- 
munk, Tamias striatits Baird, was very fond of them. I have seen this mammal 
climb to the highest limbs of an apple tree seeking cicadas. 

When cicadas fell into our streams many of them became the prey of various species 
of fish. Our fishermen complained of their inability to get fish to take the hook while 
they were feeding upon this new food. The remains of this insect were found in black 
bass, Micropterus salmoides Henshall; blue catfish, Ichthaelurus punctatus Jordan, and 
white sucker,. Catostomus teres Le S. 

Rev. D. R. Moore, a valued fellow-worker, found two species of snails, Mesodon 
exoleta Binn., and M. elevata Say, feeding upon dead Cicadas. This fact was a great 
surprise to me. But few instances were recorded of digger wasps killing these insects. 
Stizus grandis Say « was the only species observed. Aside from the enemies men- 
tioned above, there were many others to which I could not direct my attention. In 
general, it may be said that beetles, spiders, and other insect enemies prey upon them 
incessantly, while parasitic flies, scavenger beetles, and ants destroy great numbers of 
their dead bodies. 


The peculiar fungous disease of the adult cicadas was noticed by 
Dr. Joseph Leidy in the Proceedings of the Philadelphia Academy of 
Sciences for 1851, page 235, and has since been described as Mas- 
sospora cicadina by Prof. C. H. Peck.* Mr. W. T. Hartman, of 
West Chester, Pa., speaking of the occurrence of this fungus in 1851, 

The posterior part of the abdomen in a large number of male locusts was filled by a 
greenish fungus. * * * The abdomen of the infected males was usually inflated, 
dry, and brittle, and totally dead while the insect was yet flying about. Upon break- 
ing off the hind part of the abdomen, the dust-like spores would fly as from a small 

One male specimen, received in 1868 from Pennsylvania, was 
affected by the same or a similar fungus, the internal parts of the 
abdomen being converted into what appeared to be a brown mold. 
R. H. Warder, of Cleves, Ohio, in speaking of this mold, says: 

I found that in many cases the male organs of generation remained so firmly attached 
to the female during copulation that the male could only disengage himself by break- 
ing away and leaving one or two posterior joints attached to the female, and it is these 
mutilated males which I found affected by the. peculiar fungus mentioned, and there- 
fore conclude that the dry rot might be the result of the broken membranes. 

o Synonymous with Sphedus speciomis Drury. 

b Thirty-fii«t Kept. N. Y. State Museum Nat. Hist., 1879, p. 44. 


It is well established, however, that both males and females are 
affected by this disease, the former, however, in the greatest num- 
bers, and that it is by no means confined to injiyed individuals. 

Professor Peck describes this disease in general terms as follows: 

The fungus develops itself in the abdomen of the insect, and consists almost wholly 
of a mass of pale-yellowish or clay-colored spores, which to the naked eye has the 
appearance of a lump of whitish clay. The insects attacked by it become sluggish 
and averse to flight, so that they can easily be taken by hand. After a time some of 
th(» posterior rings of the abdomen fall away, revealing the fungus within. Strange as 
it may seem, the insect may, and sometimes does, live for a time in this condition. 
Though it is not killed at once, it is manifestly incapacitated for propagation, and 
therefore the fungus may be said to prevent to some extent the injury that would 
otherwise be done to the trees by these insects in the deposition of their eggs. For 
the same reason, the insects of the next generation must be less numerous than they 
otherwise would be, so that the fungus may be regarded as a beneficial one. In 
Columbia County the disease prevailed to a considerable extent. Along the line of 
the railroad between Catskill and Livingston stations many dead cicadas were found, 
not a few of which were filled by the fungoid mass.« 

Professor Peck was not able to satisfy himself as to the time when 
the Cicada is attacked by this fungus, suggesting the possibility of its 
having entered the ground with the larva and slowly developed with 
its host, or perhaps entering the body of the pupa at the moment that 
it emerges from the ground, with the third possibility of its developing 
annually in the cicadas which appear every year, and becoming much 
more abundant, and therefore noticeable, in the years of the appear- 
ance of the great swarms of periodical cicadas. The latter supposi- 
tion is unquestionably the correct explanation. Mr. A. W. Butler 
refers to this disease at some length in his notes on the Cicada in 
southern Indiana in 1885, and is of the opinion that nearly all of the 
male cicadas which are not killed by birds and other enemies ulti- 
mately succumb to this disease. 



In discussing this subject it is well to be again reminded that the 
fears aroused by the presence of this insect when in great numbers are 
unquestionably out of all proportion to the real damage likely to be 
done. While they are most abundant in old and tmdisturbed forest 
tracts and confine their woris: for the most part to forest trees, it is true 
also that in parks and lawns, especially such as contain trees of the 
original forest growth or their natural and immediate successors, the 
cicadas sometimes appear in scarcely diminished numbers. This is 
true also of orchards located oh cleared lands or in the vicinity of 
standing forests, and under such circumstances instances of serious or 
fatal results to cherished plants or fruit trees are not uncommon. 

oLoc. cit., pp. 19,20. 


Notwithstanding the occasional instances of serious injury by the 
Cicada, it is probably still true that there is no other important 
injurious insect in this country that is responsible for so little serious 
damage in proportion to the fears aroused, and yet every recurrence of 
this insect calls forth the most anxious demands for means of control 
or extermination. The exploitation of the facts concerning this insect 
is, therefore, more to allay such fears, and to supply the desire for 
information concerning it which its presence always arouses, than 
from the necessity of detailing elaborate precautionary measures. 

It is, nevertheless, important to know what may be done in the way 
of protection and control whenever occasion arises to make such 
action necessary, as for the protection of young fruit trees which are 
especially exposed to injury or trees and shrubs over limited areas, as 
in parks and lawns. 

Precautionary operations are necessarily against the adults chiefly, 
as being the authors of the greater damage. Against the larvae and 
pupae in their subterranean life it is hardly worth while to take any 
action unless it be deemed desirable to attempt to exterminate a brood 
within a given territory or bit of w^oodland, in which case the remedies 
commonly employed against other subterranean insects, such as the 
Phylloxera or other root lice, will serve for this insect equally well, 
especially in the first year or two of its existence. 

The prevention of injury from the Cicada includes, therefore, (1) 
methods of destroying the emerged insects, either mechanically or by 
insecticide applications; (2) applications to the plant J^o prevent 
oviposition; (3) certain precautionary measures which may be taken 
to lessen injury; and (4) operations to destroy the larval and pupal 
stages in the soil. 


Collection op Adults. 

In some instances the hand collection of the insects is feasible and 
will prevent damage. This method necessitates the continual driving 
of the insects from the plants by fighting or collecting them in umbrel- 
las or bags in the early morning or late evening when they are some- 
what torpid and sluggish. If undertaken at the first appearance of 
the Cicada and repeated each day, the work of control will be facili- 
tated by the fact that most of the insects will be on the young trees or 
shrubbery or on the lower branches of larger trees and within com- 
paratively easy reach. 

An instance of this kind of work is recorded by Mr. Abner Hoopes, 
of West Chester, Pa." The work reported was for the protection of 
nursery stock on the edge of woods from the attack of Brood X in 

o Entomological News, Vol. XVIII, March, 1907, pp. 108, 109. 


1902. Tliere were 240,000 peach trees in the field to be protected, 
and seven men were kept at work in this field for over two weeks, and 
by actual count it was found that these men killed more than 1,000 
cicadas each per day by hand collecting. Seventy thousand cicadas 
were collected in this field alone, and other men were employed in the 
smaller fields, so that Mr. Hoopes feels sure that at least 100,000 
were killed altogether. In spite of this work, however, a loss of 12,000 
trees was sustained out of the 240,000. 

Destruction with Insecticides. 

The various treatments aiming at the destruction of the insects 
themselves have yielded satisfactory results, but to have any practi- 
cal value it is necessary to continue them daily or as long as the 
insects issue in any numbers. On a large scale, therefore, or over a 
considerable territory, in the presence of immense swarms, work of 
this sort will be ordinarily out of the question. The recommenda- 
tions apply particularly, therefore, to small areas or orchards. Such 
work may be directed against the Cicada the moment it emerges from 
the ground, while still in the pupal stage, but perhaps more readily 
and successfully against the insect after it has shed its pupal skin and 
is still soft and comparatively helpless, and with less ease, but still 
with some degree of effectiveness, after it has hardened and begun 
its aerial duties. 

Of the many substances experimented with few proved to be of 
much valuA, the best results being obtained with (1) pyrethrum or 
insect powder, using it both in the dry form and as an aqueous solu- 
tion; (2) kerosene emulsions; and (3) solutions of various acids. 
These substances either effected the immediate death of the insect, 
or attained this end indirectly by preventing its transformation from 
the pupal to the adult stage; in other words, rendering the last molt 

Pyrethrum powder is a perfectly satisfactory destroyer of the newly 
transformed and soft cicadas, and has considerable efficacy against 
the mature and hardened individuals. The best results are obtained 
in the morning, before the insects have gained full strength to ascend 
and while the plants are still wet with dew. The powder may be 
puffed on the insects while clinging to shrubbery or on the lower 
branches of the larger trees. 

Pyrethrum powder is absolutely worthless against the pupse, which 
even when thoroughly coated with it, will often succeed in casting off 
their powdered skins and escape uninjured. The winged insects are, 
however, very sensitive to the powder, and after an application soon 
show signs of uneasiness and in the course of a few hours fall helpless 
to the ground, where, though they may continue to have the power of 
motion for a day or more, a fatal termination is almost sure to follow. 


The pyrethrum and water mixture is prepared by stirring up as 
much of the powder as the water will hold in suspension, or a little 
milk may be added to increase the holding power of the water. The 
results obtained with pyrethrum in water against the transformed 
insects are as satisfactory as with the dry powder, with the additional 
advantage of its being possible to throw the water by force pumps to 
parts of the plant where it would be difficult to place the powder. 
Against the pupse, the water solution is more effective than the 
powder, but is less so than kerosene emulsion. 

Kerosene emulsion, as an application for destroying the emerged 
pupae and adults, is used in very strong solution, or at a strength 
ranging from one part of the emulsion to one of water up to a dilution 
of the emulsion with eight parts of water. The greater strengths were 
more immediate in their effects, but even with the more diluted washes 
very satisfactory results have been obtained. The emulsion at once 
stops all molting or transformation. Applied to the partly trans- 
formed insects, the soft wings harden into shapeless masses, and while 
occasional individuals may survive the treatment for two days or 
more, the application is usually fatal in the end. The treated pupae 
are unable to transform to the adult stage and they eventually die or 
are devoured by their natural enemies. The death of the mature and 
hardened insect is caused by closing its breathing pores with the oily 
mixture, and in the case of the partly expanded or soft, immature 
individuals by the caustic effect it has on the forming wings and soft 

The experiments with acids demonstrated also that exuviation may 
be prevented by spraying the newly emerged pupa with a 2 per cent 
solution of carbolic acid or a 15 per cent solution of acetic acid. 

Appucations to Prevent Oviposition. 

All the early experiments with washes or other applications to 
prevent oviposition proved unavailing except such protections as 
could be applied to small trees or shrubs, such as covering them with 
netting. Professor Riley in 1868, and later, at his instance. Dr. 
W. S. Barnard, tested a number of repellent substances, such as 
kerosene emulsion, various oils, and carbolic-acid solutions, all pun- 
gent and disagreeably smelling substances, with results either unsat- 
isfactory or of negative value. 

In the occurrence in 1902 of Brood X some indications were obtained 
showing the possible protective value of lime washes. Mr. Slinger- 
land reports that spraying a heavy coat of whitewash on the trees 
will keep the locusts away to some extent when there are other 
trees in the neighborhood. He states that the reason for this seems 
to be that the insects do not like to sit on a white surface. The 


females will, however, oviposit on whitewashed twigs if there is no 
other plac^ for them. 

The experience reported by Mr. W. B. Alwood ^ would seem to 
indicate that the injury from the Cicada in orchards is prevented by 
the use of Bordeaux mixture. The cicadas appeared in tuU force in 
a young orchard which had been sprayed with this mixture, but 
practically all migrated elsewhere without ovipositing in the trees. 
Other orchards near the one referred to by Mr. Alwood were badly 
punctured. In view of this experience it may be that Bordeaux 
mixture or the lime-sulphur wash will prove a valuable preventive of 
injury from this insect. 

Precautionary Measures. 

In view of the difficulty of controlling this insect on a large scale 
after it has once emerged, it is well to adopt any precautionary 
measures that may tend to lessen or distribute the injury. The 
advent of all the large and well-recorded broods is commonly heralded 
in advance in the local papers by State entomologists or other per- 
sons who take interest in such recurrences. Forewarned in this way, 
much injury and loss may be avoided by neglecting all pruning 
operations during the winter and spring prior to the expected appear- 
ance of the Cicada in order to offer a larger twig growth and distrib- 
ute by this means the damage over a greater surface. Another pre- 
caution, when a Cicada year is expected, is to defer the planting of 
orchards, especially in the vicinity of old orchards or forest land, 
until the danger is past. The same advice applies to budding or 
grafting operations in the fall and spring prior to the Cicada^s appear- 
ance. Much disappointment arising from injury to orchards or val- 
uable nursery stock may thus be avoided. Vigorous young trees 
will, it is true, often recover in three or four years from the effects 
of a loss of or injury to a considerable percentage of their branches, 
but it is difficult to overcome the unsymmetrical appearance which 
will commonly result from the indiscriminate pruning caused by the 
work of this insect, and the gnarled and scarified branches will long 
bear testimony to the industry of the female insect. 

Much of the injury occasioned by the cutting of the twigs by the 
female Cicada in depositing her eggs can be remedied by subsequent 
proper treatment of the wounded plant. In the case of old trees, the 
main object to be secured is the rapid healing of the wounds and the 
prevention of their being used as points of secondary attack by other 
insects. The worst injured limbs in such trees should be cut out, so 
that all the vigor of the plant may be directed to the remaining wood. 
Any treatment also, as of thorough cultivation or the use of ferti- 

aproc. 15th Ann. Mtg. Assn. Economic Entomologists, Bui. 40, Bur. Ent., p. 75. 


lizers, which will give the plant a more vigorous growth, will hasten 
the healing process." With young trees the worst affected branches 
should be removed, and the less injured ones protected from other 
insects while they are healing by coating the wounded parts with 
grafting wax or a moderately hard soap. These protective coverings 
should be renewed at least once a year, preferably in the spring, until 
the wounds are entirely healed over. In the case of a badly injured 
tree that has been recently budded or grafted, it may be well to cut 
it back nearly to the bud or graft, so that an entirely new top may 
be made. 


While it is probably true, as we have already stated, that the Cicada 
in its underground life does not work any serious injury to plants on 
account of the very insignificant amount of nutriment which it annu- 
ally draws from the rootlets, nevertheless in exceptional cases, where 
the ground is suspected of being very thickly populated with the larvae 
and pupae of this insect, it rxiay be deemed desirable to undertake their 
extermination. This may be accomplished, as suggested, by using the 
remedies ordinarily employed against other subterranean insects, such 
as the Phylloxera and the apple root-aphis, with this difference, that 
the poisons will have to be introduced more deeply into the soil 
unless apphed in the first or second year after the larvee have begun 
their development. 

If taken in time, the number of the larvse in the soil may be greatly 
reduced by cutting off the branches of the trees which have been 
thickly oviposited in, thus preventing the hatching of the eggs. It 
will rarely, however, be possible to so completely eliminate the eggs 
from the tree as to prevent the entrance of the larvae into the soil in 
considerable numbers. 

Of the means employed against subterranean insects two are espe- 
cially suitable for the destruction of the larvae and pupae of the 
Cicada — ^namely, bisulphid of carbon injected into the ground and 
tobacco dust incorporated in the soil. 

Tobacco dust has a manurial value and is not at all injurious to 
plants. Its value against Cicada larvae is purely theoretical, but there 
is little doubt but that if it can be incorporated in the soil some dis- 
tance below the surface — ^namely, by first removing 6 inches or more of 
the top soil — ^it will effect the destruction of many of the delicate larvae 
and pupae of the cicadas. This dust is a waste product of tobacco 
factories and costs about 1 cent per pound, and is worth nearly its cost 
as a fertilizer. 

Bisulphid of carbon, the popular French remedy for the grape root- 
aphis, will undoubtedly prove an efficient means against the Cicada in 
31117— No. 71—07 10 


its underground life. It will be necessary, however, except in the first 
year or two of the existence of the larvae, to inject it to a depth of at 
least 12 inches below the surface. It should not be introduced into the 
soil closer to the crown of young plants than 1 J feet, and not more than 
an ounce of the chemical should be introduced into each hole, which 
should be immediately closed. An injection should be made to about 
every scjuare yard of surface. The bisulphid rapidly evaporates and 
penetrates throughout the soil, and is very deadly to insects. It is 
highly inflammable, and should not, therefore, be poured from one 
vessel to another near a fire. It may be introduced into the soil by 
means of injecting machines. This treatment is not expensive, and 
will be valuable for orchards, small groves, or private grounds. 


As would naturally be inferred of an insect as interesting as the 
periodical Cicada, the writings which have been devoted to it from 
the time of its first coming to the attention of the colonists to the 
present have .been most voluminous in number and extent; much 
of this literature, however, is of a fugitive character and scattered 
through publications not now obtainable. 

The earliest published account of the periodical Cicada which 
has come under my own observation was brought to my attention 
by Prof. E. A. Andrews, of the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 
Md. It is contained in Volume I, No. 8, page 137, of the Philo- 
sophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, published 
January 8, 1666, and is reported, unsigned, by the '^publisher,'' 
Henry Oldenburg. The portion of the communication relating to 
the Cicada is quoted below: 

Some Observations of Swarms of Strange Insects and the Mischiefs Done 

BY Them. 

A great Observer, who hath lived long in New England, did, upon occasion, relate 
to a Friend of his in London, where he lately was, That some few years since there was 
such a Swarm of a certain sort of Insects in that English Colony, that for the space of 200 
Miles they poyson'd and destroyed all the Trees of the Country; there being found 
innumerable little holes in the ground, out of which those Insects broke forth in the 
form of Maggots, which turned into Flyes that had a kind of tail or sting, which they 
stuck into the tree, and thereby envenomed and killed it. * * * 

The rest of the article referred to a plague of locusts (grasshoppers) 
in Russia, with which the Cicada is confused. The brood referred to 
here is very likely No. XIV, which appeared in 1651. No other 
brood coincides with this narrative and No. XIV not very closely, 
but as the quotation states the relation was ''upon occasion,'' and 
was ''some few years since,'' there is ample warrant for assigning 
the account to the brood of fifteen years before. 


Prior to the discovery of the above record the earhest published 
account known was that referred to in Bulletin 14 (new series) of 
the Division of Entomology, page 112, given in a work entitled 
''New England's Memoriall,'* by Nathaniel Moreton, printed at 
Cambridge, Mass., in 1669. I was unable to get the work cited, 
but an account seen by me was a quotation from it published in an 
editorial note to an article on the ''Locust of North America,' ' in 
Barton's Medical and Physical Journal of 1804. The brood referred 
to by Moreton is undoubtedly the same one referred to above, but 
the occurrence of seventeen years previous. Moreton, publishing of 
an event happening thirty-six years after it occurred, evidently 
made a mistake of one year, the occurrence not being 1633, as stated 
by him, but 1634. We have records of this brood in New England 
from 1787 to 1906. The records, if any were made of it after 1651 
and prior to 1787, have not been discovered." 

The quotation from Moreton referred to follows : 

Speaking of a sickness which, in 1633, carried off many of the whites and Indians, 
in and near to Plimouth [Plymouth], in Massachusetts, he says, ''It is to be observed, 
that the Spring before this Sickness, there was a numerous company of Flies, which, 
were like for bigness unto Wasps or Bumble-BeeSy they came out of little holes in the 
ground, and did eat up the green things, and made such a constant yelling noise as 
made all the woods' ring of them, and ready to deaf the hearers; they were not any 
of them heard or seen by the English in the Country before this time: But the Indians 
told them that sickness would follow, and so it did, very hot in the months of June^ 
July and Avx/ust of that Summer," viz. 1633. He says, "Toward Winter the sick- 
ness ceased;" and that it was "a kinde of a pestilent Feaver." — New England's 
Memoriall, &c., pp. 90 and 91. 

The fact noted, namely, that the native Indians associated the recur- 
rences of this insect with pestilential diseases, is interesting, as showing 
that the Cicada had probably long been under observation by them 
and had exerted a vivid influence on their imaginations. 

One of the earliest references on this continent to the periodical 
Cicada is recorded in Steadman's Library of American Literature, vol- 
ume 1, pages 462-463. It is from the writings of an individual signing 
himself '^T. M.," supposed to have been Thomas Matthews, son of 
Samuel Matthews, governor of Virginia. It was written in 1705, and 
refers to three prodigies which are said to have appeared in that coun- 
try about the year 1675,^ and which, from the attending disasters, 
were looked upon as ominous presages. One of these was the appear- 
ance of a large comet; another, the flight of enormous flocks of 
pigeons; and the last, relating evidently to the periodical Cicada, as 

The third strange appearance was swarms of flies about an inch long and as big as 
the tip of a man's little finger, rising out of spigot holes in the earth, which eat the 

oSee Proc. Ent. Soc/Wash., v, pp. 126-127, February, 1903. 
& There is no recorded brood which could have appeared in 1675, and the year meant 
is probably either 1673 or 1676, both of which were cicada years. 


new-sprouted leaves from the tops of the trees without other harm, and in a 
month left us .« 

The next reference to this insect is in a journal, dated 1715, left 
by the Rev. Andreas Sandel, rector of the Swedish congregation at 
Philadelphia. It is important as giving the first reference to the use 
by the native Indians of the cicadas as an article of diet, and has 
been recently published in the Pennsylvania Magazine of History and 
Biography. The note is as follows: 

May 9 [1715], — In company with several English clergymen, Mr. Talbot, Guemey,^ 
and Clubb,b I went up to Radnor, where we laid the corner stone of a church. 

In this month some singular flies came out of the ground; the English call them 
locusts. When they left the ground holes could be seen everywhere in the roads, and 
especially in the woods. They were then encased in shells, out of which they crawled. 
It seemed most wonderful how being covered with the shell they were able to burrow 
their way in the hard ground. When they began to fly they made a peculiar noise, 
and being found in great multitudes all over the country, their noise made the cow 
bells inaudible in the woods. They were also destructive, making slits in the bark 
of the trees, where they deposited their worms, which withered the branches. Swine 
and poultry ate them; but what was more astonishing, when they first appeared 
some of the people split them open and ate them, holding them to be of the same 
kind as those to have been eaten by John the Baptist. These locusts lasted not 
longer than up to June 10, and disappeared in the woods. 

Specimens of this insect for scientific study were first carried to the 
Old World by Pehr Kalm, a pupil of Linn6, who was sent to America 
by the Swedish Government and traveled extensively in the colonies 
between 1748 and 1751. The account of his travels, pubhshed in 
Stockholm between 1753 and 1761, contains much interesting informa- 
tion relative to the common insects of this country at that early 
period, and gives a brief statement of the habits of the periodical 
Cicada. While this work was being printed, Pehr Kalm published 
a more detailed account of the species in the Swedish Transactions 
for 1756 (pp. 101-116). The account given in his travels (English 
edition, 1771, Vol. II, p. 6), is as follows: 

There are a kind of locusts which about every seventeenth year come hither in 
incredible numbers. They come out of the ground in the middle of May^ an make, 
for six weeks together, such a noise in the trees and woods that two persons that meet 
in such places, can not understand each other, unless they speak louder than the locusts 
can chirp. During that time, they make, with the sting in their tail, holes in the 
soft bark of the little branches on the trees, by which means these branches are ruined. 
They do no other harm to the trees or other plants. In the interval between the years 
when they are so numerous, they are only seen or heard single in the woods. 

«See Webster, Insect Life, Vol. II, p. 161. 

& Rev. John Clubb, a Welshman, for some time was schoolmaster in Philadelphia, 
and also assisted Rev. Evan Evans. lie also preached to the Welsh settlers at Radnor 
and vicinity, and became rector of Holy Trinity Church, Oxford. He died in Decem- 
ber of 1715. (The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. XXX, 
October, 1906, pp. 448, 449.) 


The original scientific description of the species by Liim6, based on 
material collected by Kalm, followed in 1758 * Fabricius afterwards 
described the species in two or three of his works under the name 
Tettigonia septendecim, reviving one of the old generic names of Aris- 
totle for this class of insects, but Latreille, Lamarck, and subsequent 
authors retained Linnfi's name. 

In his monographic work on the Cicadas of the world, 1788, Caspar 
Stoll gives a figure and a short description of Oicdda septendecim. 

Some popular accounts of the species closely followed Linn6's 
description. Under the title, ''Some observations on the Cicada of 
North America,'' Peter CoUinson, esq., of London, England, gave a 
rather full account of the insect as then known, assigning fourteen or 
fifteen years as its life period, and published a plate illustrating the 
adult insect and a twig lacerated by the female. ** Shortly thereafter 
appeared an article in Dodsley's Annual Register (1767, p. 103), 
entitled, "Observations on Cicada or Locust of North America, which 
appears periodically once in sixteen or seventeen years, by Moses 
Bartram, 1766, communicated by the ingenious Peter CoUinson." 

References to the periodical Cicada in American literature began 
to be more abundant toward the end of the eighteenth century and 
in the beginning of the nineteenth, Thomas Say, in 1817, referring 
to "numerous accounts of it in our public prints." Most of these, 
however, were unimportant notices and are now lost or not easily 

The most interesting contribution to the American literature of the 
Cicada of this period, comprising two papers with valuable editorial 
notes, is contained in the Barton Medical and Physical Journal of 1804, 
already cited. The first title reads: "Some particulars concerning 
the locust of North America. Written at Nazareth, in Pennsylvania, 
Aug. 27th, 1793. Communicated to the Editor, by the Reverend 
Mr. Charles Reichel, of Nazareth." The paper gives a number of 
dates of occurrence in Pennsylvania and some interesting notes on 
the habits of the Cicada — some errors in which are corrected in a note 
by the editor, who announces that he has "for several years, devoted 
a great deal of attention to the natural history of this insect" and 
"designs to publish an extensive memoir on the subject," which, 
however, he seems never to have done. 

The second paper (pp. 56-59) reads: "Additional Observations on 
the Cicada Septendecim. By the late Mr. John Bartram. From a 
MS. in the possession of the Editor." The older paper indicated in 
this title I have not seen, but it is evidently included in an account 
of travels by Bartram in Pennsylvania and Canada, printed in Lon- 
don in 1751. Under the title quoted are notes on the appearance 

oSystema Naturae, tenth edition, 1758, p. 435. 
b Philos. Trans. 1764, vol. 54, pp. 65-69. 


of a brood in the neighborhood of Philadelphia in 1749, which began 
to emerge May 10, but **in the latter end of April * * * came 
so near the surface of the ^ound, that the hogs rooted up the ground 
for a foot deep, all about the hedges and fences, under trees in search 
of them/' There follow quite accurate notes on oviposition. The 
editor concludes the article by the citation from Moreton which has 
been already quoted. 

Thomas Say, the father of American entomology, has one brief 
communication on the periodical Cicada, in which he criticises the 
use of the name '' locust, '^ and gives references to eariier literature 
and a brief note on habits." 

Another interesting communication of about the same period is by 
Dr. J. E. Davis,* in which the author controverts the ^' 14 or 15" year 
period suggested by Collinson and quotes two letters, one from the 
Hon. Judge Peters, of Belmont, Pa., and the other from Myers Fisher, 
esq., of Philadelphia, to substantiate the 17-year period. Referring 
to the noise of this Cicada, Judge Peters says: 

One of your Spa-fields meetings can give you a faint idea of their incessant and 
unmusical cheering and noise. If Hogarth had known these locusts, he would have 
placed them about the ears of his enraged musician. Knife-grindere, ballad singers, 
etc., would have been lost in their din. 

Mr. Fisher gives a very accurate, though brief, statement of the 
life cycle of the species (if his belief that they occur at great depths be 
excepted), and adds the very significant statement that ^Hhere is 
reason to believe that they appear every year in some part or other 
of the United States, with the complete period of 17 years between 
every local appearance." 

Dr. S. P. Hildreth, of Marietta, Ohio, made two very valuable con- 
tributions on the Cicada to the American Journal of Science and Arts 
(1826 and 1830), which are much more accurate than any of the earlier 
papers and too long to be quoted in this place. In the second of 
these papers he calls attention to the existence of the small form of 
Cicada, and gives a colored plate representing five views of the adult 
insect. Doctor Hildreth published a third paper also in 1847. *= 

The first account of this insect to be issued as a separate work is the 
memoir of Prof. Nathaniel Potter, of Baltimore, Md., entitled "Notes 
on the Locusts," etc., written in 1834 and privately published in 1839. 
This pamphlet of twenty-nine pages and one colored plate, represent- 
ing the insect in both sexes and also the early stages, together with 
the nature of its work on twigs, and anatomical details, was the chief 
source of information for the account published by Harris in his 
'^Insects Injurious to Vegetation, '' and while containing some wrong 

a Mem. Phila. Soc. Prom. Agric, 1818, v. 4, p. 225. 

& Jour. Sci. and Arts Roy. Inst., 1819, v. 6, pp. 372-374. 

c Loc. cit., ser. 2, vol. 3, pp. 216-218. 


inferences, gives with remarkable accuracy and detail observations on 
practically all of the features of the insect^s life history and habits 
which are open to easy study, not only in its underground existence 
but throughout its transformation and aerial life. Professor Potter 
was evidently fully aware, not only of the two distinct sizes or varieties 
of the Cicada but also of the depth to which the larvae penetrate and 
the fact of their forming roofs or turrets over their burrows some time 
before the period of their emergence — a record which has been hitherto 
overlooked and the credit for this discovery assigned to a much later 

In speaking thus most favorably of Professor Potter^s memoir it 
must not be forgotten that probably much of the actual observation 
and study upon which it is based are due to the research of Dr. Gideon 
B. Smith, of Baltimore, Md., who is given full credit in one of the 
introductory paragraphs, in these words: 

As our professional avocations would not permit us to devote our whole time to the 
pursuit, it became necessary to call in the aid of a colleague whose knowledge of ento- 
mology and industry could be relied upon. These qualifications were found and well 
exemplified in Mr. Gideon B. Smith. Should our labors reflect any light on so obscure 
a subject, the credit is equally due to him. 

These two men were the first to make a careful and at all complete 
study of the periodical Cicada, Professor Potter^s interest in the sub- 
ject dating, he says, from 1783, and great credit is due them, and 
especially to Doctor Smith, whose later work will be subsequently 

Several brief accounts of the Cicada appeared in American and for- 
eign publications about this time, adding nothing, however, to the 
facts already obtained, the most notable perhaps being the account by 
J. O. Westwood in his ''Classification of Insects,^' " in which he refers 
to the literature and habits of the species very briefly. 

The next step of real importance was the discovery of a 13-year 
southern brood by Dr. D. L. Phares, of Woodville, Miss., and the 
publication of the fact in 1845 in the Woodville Republican. 

Both before and after this time Doctor Phares was in communica- 
tion with Dr. Gideon B. Smith, referred to above, whom he evidently 
ultimately convinced of the truth of the 13-year period for the south- 
em broods. 

Doctor Smith continued for many years the work which he had 
begun as the colleague of Professor Potter, keeping his notes in the 
form of a rather voluminous manuscript, which was first prepared, 
he states, in 1834, the date signed to Professor Potter's memoir. 
Doctor Smith twice entirely rewrote and revised his manuscript, the 
title-page of the last copy reading as follows: 

The American Tx)cust Cicada sepiendecim, et trededm. Embracing the natural 
history and habits of the insect in its perfect state and while underground, with 

a 1889-40, Vol. II, p. 426. 


drawings of its several organs and the perfect insects, the egg and the young taken 
from life, with a register of the places and time of its appearance in every part of the 
Unifed States, by Gideon B. Smith, M. D. Originally written in 1834, transcribed 
with additions 1851, and rewritten with additions and illustrations in February, 1857, 
in the sixty-fourth year of my age. — G. B. S. 

This manuscript is substantially the paper by Professor Potter 
revised, with much interesting matter added and particulariy a regis- 
ter of some 21 broods in many colonies, in which are separated the 
two tribes, one of seventeen years, represented by fourteen broods 
and the other thirteen years, represented by seven broods. Doctor 
Smith's classification of the broods under these two tribes undoubt- 
edly resulted from his correspondence with Doctor Phares and perhaps 
other observers residing in the South. Most unfortunately. Doctor 
Smith failed to publish this very interesting manuscript and there- 
fore never received due credit for the valuable v/ork which he 

Townend Glover used this manuscript to some extent in his article 
on the Cicada in the Report of the U. S. Department of Agriculture for 
1867 (1868), referring to Doctor Smith as having devoted much time 
to studying the habits of the Cicada, and as the best authority on the 
subject in the Middle States, and particularly as holding that there 
are two tribes '^ differing only from each other in the period of their 
lives, the northern being seventeen years, and the other, or southern 
tribe, requiring only thirteen years in which they perform their trans- 
formations." The use of Doctor Smith's manuscript afterwards by 
Professor Riley, as will be subsequently noted, was not of such char- 
acter as to bring into prominence the real value of Doctor Smith's 
contribution to science. Two minor notes only were published by 
Doctor Smith. The first is his Scientific American note of March 22, 
1851, which was afterwards communicated by Mr. Spence to the 
London Entomological Society. "* In this note Doctoi Smith briefly 
reviews and sums up the results of his seventeen years' study of this 
insect, and states that he has located thirty different locust districts, 
occupying fourteen of the seventeen years. Since he does not men- 
tion the 13-year race he was evidently unaware of its existence as late 
as 1851. The second is a brief note in the Country Gentleman for 
May, 1869, in which he mentions both races. 

From this time on until the important publications by Walsh and 
Riley a number of articles on the Cicada appeared, some of them of 
considerable interest and value, and notably those by Miss Magaretta 
H. Morris, of Germantown, Pa., on the habits, times of appearance, 
and ravages occasioned by this insect, and by Prof. Joseph Leidy on 
the fungous disease attacking the species.^ Dr. J. C. Fisher, in 1851, 

oProc. Ent. Soc. London, April 7, 1851, Vol. I, pp. 80, 81. 

& Described by C. H. Peck as Massospora dcadina in Slst Kept. N. Y. State Mus. 
Nat. Hist., 1879, pp. 19, 20, and 44. 


described as a distinct species Cicada cassiniij the small fonn referred 
to by several of the earlier authors, and to this paper were appended 
comparative notes on the habits of the two forms by John Cassin.* 
About this time, 1851-52, also appeared the very complete account 
by Doctor Harris in his ^* Insects of New England,' ' and also some 
anatomical studies of the sexual system and musical apparatus by 
Dr. W. i. Burnett. In 1856 Dr. Asa Fitch, in his first report on the 
insects of New York, gives an extended account of the periodical 
Cicada, classifying or listing some nine broods, but not adding other- 
wise particularly to the knowledge of the insect. Several accounts 
of the species followed, including the notice of a 13-year brood, which 
Doctor Phares claims to have published in the Republican of Wood- 
ville. Miss., May 5, 1858, under the title ^^ Cicada trededm^^ — the earliest 
published suggestion of this name for the 13-year race. None of the 
other communications, including papers and notices by Fitch, Walsh, 
Glover, and Cook, is of great importance, if we except the reference 
by Glover to Smith already noted. 

The next step of real importance was the publication by Walsh and 
Riley in the first volume of the American Entomologist of a very full 
and illustrated editorial account, in which the 13-year species is char- 
acterized and the 13-year period for the southern broods is fully estab- 
lished and a register of some sixteen broods is given. Professor Riley 
in his First Missouri Report reproduces this article with the additions 
to the broods derived chiefly from the manuscript memoir by Doctor 
Smith, which had been in the meantime communicated to him by Dr. 
J, G. Morris, of Baltimore, Md. In this paper Professor Riley revised 
and renumbered the broods, increasing their number to twenty-two. 
Professor Riley's classification of the broods, and the details of the 
life history and habits of the insect, as given by Walsh and Riley in 
the American Entomologist, and later by Riley in his report, have 
been accepted as the chief source of information since. 

From the date of these articles until 1885 the additions to the liter- 
ature are chiefly of records bearing on the distribution of the broods, 
furnished notably by Rathvon, McCutcheon, Riley, Le Baron, Glover, 
Phares, Packard, Lintner, and many others. 

The recurrence in 1885 of the great Brood X of the 17-year race, 
in conjunction with the very important 13-year Brood XXIII, gave 
again 'a great stimulus to the study of this insect. Professor Riley 
published in «Tune, 1885, as Bulletin No. 8 (old series) of the Division 
of Entomology, an account of both races with a very full chronology 
of all -the known broods. These data were repeated in part, with 
important additions, in the Report of the Department for that year, 
published in 1886. Other general articles were published by Doctor 

oProc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1851, Vol. V, pp. 273-275. 


Lintner and many others. The output of literature on the peri- 
odical Cicada since 1885, if one takes the daily press notices and 
articles into account, has been enormous and particularly in the 
special Cicada years. This has resulted from the fact that as the 
dates for the appearances of all the broods are now well understood, 
the recurrences have been foretold and looked forward to, thus vastly 
increasing the popular interest. The new information gained has 
related chiefly to facts of distribution. Some interesting data have 
been given, however, on the subject of the peculiar huts or turrets, 
which are sometimes constructed by the emerging pupae, and some 
anatomical studies have been made. 

For a description of these and other papers the reader is referred to 
the bibliography of the writings on the periodical Cicada which is 
appended. The important papers from the earliest times to the 
present are listed, omitting much of the ephemeral and less valuable 
matter which added little or nothing to the knowledge of the habits 
and distribution of the species. 


[Chronologically arranged.] 

1666. [Oldenburg, Henry, "publisher"]. — "Some observations of Swarms of Strange 
Insects and the Mischiefs done by them." <Philos. Trans. London, Vol. I, 
No. 8, p. 137. 
Includes first refeienoe to periodical Cicada (Brood XIV). 

1669. MoRETON, Nathaniel. — "New England's Memoriall." <Cambridge, 1669. 

Refers to a " kinde of pestilent feaver " fatal to whites and Indians in season of 1()33 (1634?) 
ascribed by the Indians to the "flies," which appeared that year and which are briefly 
• described. 

1705. Matthews, Thomas (?).— Steadman's Lib. Am. Lit., Vol. I, pp. 462, 463 (1887). 
Quotes the writings of 1705 of "T. M.," supposed to refer to Thomas Matthews, describing 
the occurrence of a swarm of cicadas as one of three prodigies appearing about 1675. (See 
pp. 147-148.) 

1715. Sandel, Andreas. — ^Mitchell and Miller's Medical Repository, Vol. IV, p. 71. 
(Abstract.) (Memorandum dated 1715.) (See 1906.) 
Refers to the use of the cicadas as food by the Indians. 

1756. Kalm, Pehr. — Beskrifning pa et slagts Gras-Hoppor, uti Norra Americas ( Cicada 
septendecim). <Veten8k. Acad. Handl. 17, pp. 101-116 — German Transla- 
tion 1767, t. 26, pp. 130-143. 

1753-61. Kalm, Pehr. — Travels in North America. Vol. II, p. 6. 

Gives a brief account of the species, which is said to come about every 17th year. 

1758. Linne, C— Systema Naturae, 10th Edit., p. 436. 

Original description of the species. • 

1764. Collinson, Peter. — Some observations on the Cicada of North America. 

<Philos. Trans. Lond., vol. 54, pp. 65-69, 1 pi. 
1767. Bartram, Moses. — '^Dodsley's Annual Register," p. 103. 
Account in letter to Peter Collinson, London, England. 

1775. Fabricius, J. C— Syst. Ent., p. 679, No. 6; Ins., II, 1781, p. 319, No. 6; Mant. 

Ins., II, 1787, p. 266, No. 9. 
Described as Tettigonia septendecim. 

1788. Stoll, Caspar. — '*Der Cicaden," etc. 

Gives a figure and short description of Cicada septendecim. 


1804. Keichel, Rev. Charles. — Some particulars concerning the locust of IJorth 

America. <Barton Med. and Phys. Journal, Vol. I, p. 52, ff. 
1804. Bartram, John. — Additional observations on Cicada septendedm. From a MS. 

in the possession of the editor. <Barton Med. and Phys. Joum., Vol. I, pp. 

56-59. (Earlier paper prob. 1751," Miscl. in Travels in Pa. and Can. Lond., 

Sept., 1751.) 

1818. Say, T,.— Mem. Philad. Soc. Prom. Agric, vol. 4, p. 225. 

Refers to earlier literature and gives brief note on habits. 

1819. Davis, J. F. — On the Cicada septendedm, <Joum. Sci. and Arts Roy. Inst., 

vol. 6, pp. 372-374. 

Criticises i>aper of CoUinson; quotes letters by Hon. Judge Peters and Myers Fisher to 
substantiate the 17-year period. 

1826. Hildreth, S. P.— Am. Joum. Sci. and Arts, vol. 10, pp. 327-329. 
Habits and appearances detailed with considerable accuracy. 

1828. Hildreth, S. P. — ^Ueber die americanische Cicada ( CiccM?a septendedm). <Fror. 
Not., Bd. 22, No. 426, pp. 33^35. 

1828. Booth, Jesse. — Ueber die Cicada septendedm, <Fror. Not., Bd. 22, No. 468, 
pp. 84-«7. 

1830. Hildreth, S. P. — Notices and obseirvations on the American Cicada or locust. 

<Am. Joum. Sci. and Arts, vol. 18, pp. 47-50. 
Characters, habits, and appearances; refers also to existence of small forms. 

1832. Hildreth, S. P. — ^Ueber Cicada septendedm. <Isis, 1832, pp. 1059j 1060. 

1837. Children, J. G. — Proc. Ent. Soc. London, vol. 1, p. xxx. 

Exhibited specimens of the different stages and read extract from a letter from Doctor 
Harlan, of Philadelphia, giving a brief statement on habits, 17-year brood, etc, 

1839. Potter, Nathaniel. — Notes on the Locusta septentrionalis americanx dedm 

septim/i. <Baltimore, J. Robinson, 27 pp., 1 pi. 
History, habits, descriptions, and figures of Cicada septendedm. 

1839-40. Westwood, J. O. — Classification of insects, II, p. 4. 
Brief account of species and reference to the literature. 

1843. Morton, S. G., and others. — Cicada septendedm^ discussion and extracts from 

minutes in reference to. <Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., Vol. I, pp. 277-280, 

Notes on various broods of periodical Cicada. 

1845. Phares, Dr. D. L. — ^Woodville, Miss., Republican, May 17. 

Published fact of a 13-year brood in Mississippi. 

1846. Forsley, C. G. — On the Cicada septendedm in 1835 in Louisiana. <Proc. Bost. 

Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. 2, p. 162. 
Qives habits and distribution. 

1846. Morris, M. H.— Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., vol. 3, pp. 132-134. 

Ravages, habits, and the times of appearance at various places. 

1847. Morris, M. H. — Apple and pear trees destroyed by the locust. <Am. Agric, 

March, vol. 6, pp. 86, 87. 
Ravages, habits, and transformations. 

1847. Hildreth, S. P. — Cicada septendedm in 1846. <Am. Joum. Sci. and Arts, 

March, ser. 2, vol. 3, pp. 216-218, 1-2; Ann. and Mag. Nat. HLst., vol. 20, pp. 

Habits in Ohio. 

1847. Morris, M. H.— Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., vol. 3, pp. 190, 191. 
Ravages of the larvae; enemies. 

1847. Hildreth, S. P. — Die Siebzehnjahr-locust (Cicada septendedm). <Fror. Not., 

Bd. 3, No. 60, pp. 241-245. 

1848. Hildreth, S. P. — Detail sur les moeurs de la Cicada septcTidedm. <Institut, 

XVI, No. 744, pp. 107, 108. 


1848. Morris, M. H. — Destruction of fruit trees by the seventeen-year locust. <Am. 

Agric, September, vol. 7, p. 279. 
Notes on injuries to forest and fruit trees by the larvae. 

1851. Smith, Dr. Gideon B. — On the American locust {Cicada septendedm). <Scientific 
American, March 22; presented by Spence in Proc. Lond. Ent. Soc. (n. s.), 
Vol. I, 1851, pp. 80, 81. 

Reviews his work; states that he has located thirty locust districts, occupying fourteen of 
the seventeen years; 13-year race not mentioned. 

1851. Spbncb, R. H.— Proc. Ent. Soc. Lond. (n. s.), Vol. I, pp. 103, 104. 
Letter on the Cicada in Maryland in 1851. 

1851. Leidy, J.— Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., Vol. V, p. 235. 
Characters of the spores of a fungus affecting the Cicada. 

1851. Fisher, Dr. J. C— Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., Vol. V, pp. 272, 273. 

Description of Cicada cassinH as a new species hitherto confounded with C. septendedm. 

1851. Cassin, John. — Notes on the above species of Cicada (C. cassinii), and on the 
Cicada septendedm Linn. <Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., September, Vol. V, 
pp. 273-275. 
Characters and habits of Cicada septendedm and of Cicada cassinii compared. 

1861. Burnett, Dr. W. J. — Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., IV, p. 71 and p. 111. 
Sexual system and musical apparatus; appearance in cleared lands. 

1851. Burnett, Dr. W. J. — Points in the economy of the 17-year locust (Cicada septen- 

dedm) bearing on the plural origin and special local creation of the species. 
<Proc. Am. Ass. Adv. Sci., 6th Meet., pp. 307-311. 

1852. Wild, Ph. — Sur les moeurs de la Cicada septendedm. <Ann. Soc. Ent. France, 

2d Ser. vol. 10., Bui., pp. XVIII, XIX. 

1852. Harris, T. W.— Insects of New England, pp. 180-189; Ins. Inj. to Veget., 1860, 

pp. 206-217; do. Flint Edit., 1863, pp. 206-219. 
General account of the species. 

1852. EvANS, Gurdon. — Insects injurious to vegetation. <Tran8. N. Y. State Agric. 
Soc. for 1851, vol. 11, pp. 741-751. 
Notes concerning various insects of Madison County, N. Y., including the 17-year Cicada. 

1854. Fitch, A. — Report (on the noxious, beneficial, and other insects of the State of 
New York). <Trans. N. Y. State Agric. Soc. for 1854, vol. 14, pp. 742-753; 
1st and 2d Repts., Albany, 1856, pp. 38-49. 
Gives a general account of the species and enumerates nine broods. 

1857. Smith, Dr. Gideon B. — The American locust, etc. < Last revision. February. 

Unpublished manuscript used in part by Glover and Riley. 

1858. Phares, Dr. D. L. — Republican, Woodville, Miss., May 5. 

Published a notice of the 13-year brood under the title ** Cicada irededm." 

1859. Smith, Dr. G. B.— Country Gentleman, May 12, vol. 13, p. 308. 

* • Predicts the appearance of locusts the coming spring in Virginia, Maryland, North Caro- 
lina, Tennessee, Georgia, and Mississippi. They belong to the tribe of thirteen and seventeen 
year locusts." (13-year Brood XXIII and 17-year Brood I.) 

1860. Fitch, A.— The Entomologist, No. 22— The 17-year Cicada. <The Country 

Gentleman, March 29, vol. 15, p. 210. 

Remarks on popular names for insects; regularity of appearance of Cicada septendedm; 
necessity of ascertaining its distribution in order to predict its future visitations. 

1861. StAl, C— Ann. Soc. Ent. France, 4th ser.. Vol. I, Septer-.ber, p. 618. 

Reference of Cicada septeTid-ecim to genus Tibicen Latr. 

1862. Herrick, E. C. — Uprising of the 17-year Cicada in New Haven County, Conn., 

in 1860. <Am. Journ. Arts and Sci., 2d ser., vol. 33, pp. 433, 434. 
1865. Riley, C. V. — Seventeen-year locust. <Prairie Farmer, August 19, vol. 32 
(n. s., vol. 16), p. 127. 

Agrees with S. P. G. in doubting that Cicada septendedm lives seventeen years immaturOf 
and gives reasons for his doubt. 


1865. Walsh, B. D.— Pract. Ent., December 25, VoL I, pp. 18, 19. 

Answer to inquiry of M. S. Hill; Cicada districts of the United States, as given by Fitch in 
New York Report, I, p. 39; habits. 

1866. Riley, C. V. — ^Prairie Farmer, September 1, vol. 34 (n. s., vol. 18), p. 136. 

Answer to inquiry of J. D. Swain; condensed account of Cicada canicularis; comparison 
with Cicada septendecim. 

1866. Walsh, B. D.— Pract. Ent., December, vol. 2, p. 33. 

Answer to inquiry of M. S. Hill; Cicada septendecim compared with an undescribed 8X)ecies, 

1867. Leidy, Dr. Joseph. — Proc. Ac. Nat. Sci. Phila., p. 93. 

Mentions recent appearance in various counties in Virginia. 

1867. Glover, T.— Rept. (U. S.) Comm. Agric. for 1866, p. 29. 
Brief notes, with dates of appearance. 

1867. Walsh, B. D.— Pract. Ent., February, vol. 2, p. 56. 

Answer to inquiry of M. 8. Hill; variations in the ima^o. 

1868. Walsh, B. D. — ^The 17-year locust. <Dixie Farmer, June 11. 

Periodicity and local distribution of the various broods. 

1868. Rutherford, H. — New York Semi- Weekly Tribune, June 27. 

Records the appearance of Brood X in Rutland County, Vt., in 1851 and 1868, and also of 
Brood XIV on Long Island in 1866. 

1868. Riley, C. V. — ^The 17-year Cicada. <Prairie Farmer, July 4, vol. 38 (n. s., 
vol. 22), p. 2. 
Dates and localities of occurrences. 

1868. RttEY, C. v.— Prairie Farmer, July 11, vol. 38 (n. s., vol. 22), p. 10. 
Occurrence in Michigan. 

1868. Glover, T.— Rept. (U. S.) Comm. Agric. for 1867, pp. 67-71, figs. (Published 

after July.) 

General account of the species, quoting Harris and Smith, and referring to the latter's 
13-year broods. 

1868. Walsh, B. D. — Study of periodical Cicada. <Am. Ent., Vol. I, pp. 7, 8. 

Records unsuccessful experiments to get the Cicada to sting the flesh, and urges that the 
stings are probably by Stizus grandis.a 

1868. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley. — The sting of the 17-year Cicada. <Am. Ent., 

October, Vol. I, pp. 36, 37. 

Communications from F. W. Collins, R. Richardson, and B. Borden on the reputed sting 
of the Cicada and on the habits of Stizus grandis. a 

1868. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley. — The periodical Cicada. <Am. Ent., 

December, Vol. I, pp. 63-72, figs. 58-64. Extract: Op. cit., June, 1869, Vol. 

I, p. 202. 

Characterization of the 13-year broods of Cicada as a new species, Cicada tredecim; dimor- 
phism of the same and of Cicada septeTidecim; seasons, natural history, transformations, 
enemies, sting, and injuries of these species; chronological history of their several known 
broods; figures the several stages of Cicada septendedm, the towers made by the pupae, and 
twigs with eggs. 

1868. Cook, A. J. — Remarks on some insects injurious to vegetation in Michigan. 

<7th Annual Rept. Seer. State Board Agriculture Michigan for 1868, pp. 

Habits and means against Cicada septendecim. 

1868. Riley, C. V.— Entomology. <Prairie Farmer Annual (No. 2 for 1869), pp. 30- 

41, 6 figs. 

Includes an account of the periodical Cicada, with figures. 

1869. Warder, R. H. — Notes on the periodical Cicada. It does o\4posit in ever- 

greens. <Am. Ent., February, Vol. I, p. 117. 

Oviposition of Cicada septendecim in three evergreens; note on the fungus found in the 
abdomen of the Cicada; injuries to young orchards. 

a Synonym of Sphecius speciosus. 


1869. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley.— Am. Ent., February, Vol. I, p. 117. 
Comments on the above. 

1869. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada. <lst Rept. Ins. Mo., March, pp. 18-42. 
General account following Walsh-RUey article in American Entomologist and incorporating 
facts on distribution of broods from Doctor Smith's manuscript, renumbering the broods 
and Increasing them to twenty-two. 

1869. Rathvon, S. S. — ^Hatching of the 17-year Cicada. <Ain. Nat., April, vol. 

, 3, p. 106. 

1869. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley. — Out of evil there cometh good. <Am. 

Ent., June, Vol. I, p. 202. 

Probable abundance of the fruit crop in southern Illinois and in Missouri in 1869 due to the 
pruning of the trees by Cicada septendecim in 1868. 

1869. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley.— The 'periodical Cicada. <Ain. Ent., 
June, Vol. I, p. 202. 
Request for records of appearance in 1860. 

1869. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley. — Belated individuals of the periodical Cicada. 

<Am. Ent., July, Vol. I, p. 217. 
Occurrence of scattering individuals in years before or after their regular period. 

1869. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley. — Eggs of periodical Cicada in savin-twig. 

<Am. Ent., July, Vol. I, p. 228. 

Answer to inquiry of J. A. Oreason; Cicada aeptendecim ovipositing in twigs otJunipems 

1869. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley. — ^The periodical Cicada; our first brood 
established. <Ain. Ent., August, Vol. I, p. 244. 
Appearance in Connecticut of a brood in 1869. 

1869. Walsh, B. D., and C. V. Riley. — Insects named. <Ain. Ent., August, Vol. I, 

p. 251. 

Answer to inquiry of D. L. Phares; irregular appearance of (Hcada iredecim ( Tibicen 

1869. Rathvon, S. S. — Cicada notes. <Am. Ent., November, vol. 2, p. 51. 

Gives habits and appearance. 

1870. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada alias the 17-year and 13-year locust. <;Am. 

Ent. and Bot., May, p. 211. 

Quotes from the 1st Ann. Rept. State Ent. Mo., the localities in which Cicada septendecim 
and Cicada tredecim will appear in 1870, with requests for reports of the occurrence of these 


1^70. Kite, Wm.— The 17-year Cicada. <Am. Nat., vol, 3, p. 106. 

1870. Morris, John G. — Seventeen-year locust two years too late. <Am. Ent. and 

Bot., September, vol. 2, p. 304. 

Occurrence of a retarded Cicada septendecim in Maryland in 1870; note on the year of the 
appearance of the Cicada in Yorlc County, Pa. 

1870. Walsh, B. D. — Am. Ent., October, p. 335. (Posthumc is paper.) 

Argues for the specific distinctness of 17 and 13 year races as illustrative of a general problem 
in article "On the Grape Eurytomides," etc. 

1870. Rathvon, S. S. — Periodical Cicada not in Kreutz Creek Valley. <[Am. Ent. 
and Bot., December, vol. 2, p. 372. 
Notes peculiarities in local distribution. 

1870. McCuTCHEN, A. R. — Periodical cicadas in Georgia. <Am. Ent. and Bot., 

December, vol. 2, p. 372. 
Occurrence in Georgia in 1866, 1869, and 1870. 

1871. Le Baron , W. — Locust or periodical Cicada. <Prairie Farmer, April 29, vol. 42. 

Natural history. 

1871. Le Baron, W. — Prairie Farmer, June 3, vol. 42. 

Occurrence of larv» of Cicada septendecim in southern. Illinois. 

BI BLIOG R APH Y . 1 59 

]872. Riley, C. V.— Fourth Rept. Ins. Mo., April, pp. 30-34. 

Gives the data collectod on the six broods which had appeared since the publication of 
article in first report. 

1H72. DiMMOCK, G. — Insects infesting apple trees. No. 1. <New England Home- 
stead, June 1, vol. 5, No. 4, p. 25. 
Treats of Cicada septeridecim, etc. 

1872. DiMMOCK, G. — Insects infesting apple trees. No. 4. <New England Home- 
stead, June 22, vol. 5, No. 7, p. 49. 
Treats of Cicada (— Tibicen) septendecim, etc. 

1872. Howard, J. W. — Phillips' Southern Farmer, October. 

Reports the occurrence of the Cicada at Flat Bayou, La., in 1872. 

1872. Le Baron, W.— Second Rept. Ins. Ills., pp. 124-133. 

General account from Harris, Fitch, and Riley. • 

1873. Brown, J. J. — Coleman's Rural World, January 1. 

Records the appearance of the Cicada in northwestern Arkansas along the White River 
and its tributaries; traces them back in 13-year periods to 1803. 

1873. Glover, T. — Report of the entomologist and curator of the museum. <Rept. 

(U. S.) Comm. Agric. for 1872, pp. 112-138, 26 figs. 
Appearance and ravages of Cicada septendecim. 

1873. Phares, Dr. D. L. — Southern Field and Factory, Jackson, Miss., April. 
Refers to his previous publications in the Republican on the 13-year broods. 

1873. Phares, Dr. D. L. — Southern Field and Factory, Jackson, Miss., August. 
Records of Brood XXII since 1806; its extent in Louisiana and Mississippi. 

1873. Packard, A. S. — Third annual report of the injurious and beneficial effects of 

insects in Massachusetts. 20th Ann. Rept. Sec. Mass. Bd. Agric, pp. 16-20, 

figs. 142, 143. 
Includes general account of periodical Cicada. 

1873. Packard, A. S. — Am. Naturalist, vol. 7, p. 536, September. 
Reprint with corrections of article in Third Annual Report. 

1875. Bethune, (\ J. S. — Grasshoppers or locusts. -.Ann. Rept. Ent. Soc. Ont. for 

1874, p. 29, fig. 30. 
In article on grasshopper ravages, etc.; discusses confusion in use of name Locust. 

1876. Riley, 0. V.— Periodical Cicada, "17-year locust. " <New York Semi-Weekly 

Tribune, June 23, 3 figs. 

Occurrence at Lexington, Va., in 1876; list of localities at which these insects will appear 
this year; chronological history of a brood; figures of larva, pupae, and imago. 

1877. Riley, C. V. — Entomological notes. <Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, December, 

vol. 3, pp. 217, 218; see Am. Nat., October, 1876, vol. 10, p. 635. 

Includes correction of vernacular name of Cicada septendecim; occurrence of the same in 
Virginia in 1876; yearly development. 

1877. Leidy, Jos. — Remarks on the 17-year locust, etc. <Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. 
Phila., pp. 260, 261. 

1877. Riley, V. V. — The periodical Cicada. <Western Farmer's Almanac for 1878, p. 

48; Colman's Rural World, November 28, 1877. 
Popular description and natural history; chronology of twenty-two diflferent broods. 

1878. OsBORN, H.--The 17-year locust. Western Farm Journal, July. 

General account of natural history. 

1878. Bessey, r. E. — Iowa Weather Bulletin, November. 

Gives an account of the distribution of the Cicada in Iowa, illustrated by a State map. 

1879. OsBORN, II. —Report of noxious insects. "Trans. Iowa State Hortic. Soc. for 

1878, vol. 13, pp. 368-402. 
Includes habits and natural history of Cicada septendeciw- 

1879. Peck, C. H. -Thirty-first Rept. N. Y. State Mus. Nat. Hist., pp. 19, 20, and 44. 
description of Cicada fungous parasites as Massospora cicadina. , 


1879. Strkcker, Hermann. -The (Ucada in Texas. <Science News, Vol. I, No. 16, 

p. 256. 
1879. Riley, C. V.— New York Tribune, 1879; Colman's Rural World, June 25. 

Boundaries of the areas In which Cicada septendecim Is expected to occur in 1879; request 

for information of its appearance. 

1879. OsBORN, H. — Seventeen-year locusts. <College Quarterly, September, vol. 2, 

p. 58. 
Occurrence in southwestern Iowa in 1879. 

1880! RiLEY, C. V. — The 17-year ("icada in Iowa. <^' Am. Ent., February, vol. 3 (n. s., 

Vol. I), pp. 25, 26. 

Review of the above; limits of the broods of 1854-1871, 1861-1878, and 1862-1879 in Iowa; 
occurrence of the last brood in Missouri; comparison of the distribution of these broods with 
the distribution of timber trees. 

1880. Bessby, C. E. — On the distribution of the 17-year Cicada of the brood of 1878, 

or Riley's Brood XIII, in Iowa. Am. Ent., February, vol. 3 (n. s., Vol. I), 

pp. 27-30, fig. 7. 
Summary of replies to inquiries concerning distribution in Iowa in 1878, with map. 

1880. Chambers, V. T.— Am. Ent.. Vol.^III, p. 77, March. 

Occurrence in Cheyenne Canyon, Colorado, in 1870. (Probably erroneous.) 

1880. Riley, 0. V. — Fungus in Cicada. Am. Ent., June, vol. 3 (n. s.. Vol. I), p. 14. 

1880. Riley, C. V.— The periodical Cicada. ' Am. Ent., July, Vol. 3 (n. s., Vcl. I), 

pp. 172, 173, fig. 76. 
Broods which appear in 1880. 

1880. Robinson, F. C. — Seventeen-year Cicada in Pennsylvania. <Am. Ent., July, 
vol. 3 (n. s.. Vol. I), p. 178. 
Occurrence at Uniontown, Pa., in 1880. 

1880. Barnes, Harley. — Periodical Cicada in Geauga County, Ohio. <Am. Ent., 
September, vol. 3 (n. s.. Vol. I), p. 226. 
Abundance in western Ohio. 

1880. Barnes, H. — Seventeen-year Cicada in Ohio. < Am. Ent., September, vol. 3 

(n. s.. Vol. I), pp. 227, 228. 
Seasons and injuries. 

1881. Riley, C. V.— BuI. 6, U. S. Ent. Comm., March, p. 58. 

Orthography of name; quotes Walsh as to validity of tredecim as true species. 

1881. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada alias ** 17-year locust." <Am. Ent., June 
(May 19), v. 25, pp. 479-482, fig. 1. Correction ibid., July (June' 22), 1881, 
p. 578. 

Extract from First Missouri Report, with additional notes; figures ^gs, puprx;, imago, 
and punctured twig. 

1881. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada alias " 1.7-year locust. ' ' <Fanner'8 Review, 
June 16, vol. 6, p. 370. 

Extract from First Missouri Report, with additional notes and requests for further informa- 
tion in regard to distribution of the broods which appear in 1881. 

1881. . — Sci. Amer., vol. 45, p. 21, July 9. 

Records the appearance of the Cicada in southern Illinois, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Mobile, 
Ala., in that year. 

1881. Riley, C. V. — Selma, Ala., Times, July 19, Cicada tredecim^ abundant in Ala- 
bama, as predicted. 

1881. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada. <Am. Agric, August, vol. 40, p. 132, 

5 figs. 
Brief sketch of the natural history, with figures. 


1882. Lintner, J. A. — The 17-year locust. <Ontario [N. Y.] County Times, July 12, 

(N.Y.)vol.28, p. 3. 

Years of appearance during the present half century; broods in New York; injuries and 


1882. Riley, C. V. — Cicada septendedm. <Gardener's Mo. and Hortic, September, 
vol.24,pp. 274, 275. 

Orthography of the names Cicada tredecim and Cicada septendedm: dimorphic forms; 
Massospora cicadina parasitic on Cicada. 

1882. OsBORN, H. — Insects of the forest — Cicada septendedm. <Iowa State Leader, 

December 2. 
Food habits of Cicada aeptejidficim: life history. 

1883. Riley, C. V. —Am. Nat., March (February 21), voL 17, p. 322. 

Instinct of Cicada and sense direction in insects. 

1883. Saunders, Wm. — Ins. Inj. to Fruits, pp. 35-39. 
General account of the species. 

1883. Bessey, C. E. — The periodical Cicada in southeastern Massachusetts. <Am. 

Nat., October (September 17), vol. 17, p. 1071. 
Abundant in June, 1883, in Marthas Vineyard; notes by C. V. Riley. 

1884. OsBORN, H. — Insects of the orchard. <Bul. Iowa Agric. College, August, No. 2, 

pp. 87-97. Trans. Iowa State Hortic. Soc. for 1883 (1884), vol. 18, pp. 510-521. 
Includes reference to periodical Cicada. 

1884. Uhler, p. R.— Cassino's Stand. Nat. Hist., II, p. 227. 

Natural history and distribution. 

1885. Riley, C. V. — Destroying Cicadas. <Rural New Yorker, May 23, vol. 44, p.353. 

Reply to letter of J. A. K . 

1885. Riley, C. V. — Expected advent of the locust. <Sci. Am., May 23, vol. 52, p. 320. 
Farmer's Home Journ., June 13, 1885. Orange County (N. Y.) Farmer, May 
28, 1885. See Sci. Am., June 20, 1885, vol. 52, p. 389. 

Simultaneous appearance of a 17-year and a 13-year brood; localities of the two broods; life 
history and habits. 

1885. Weed, C. M. — The coming locust plague. <Prairie Farmer, May 23, vol. 57, 

. p. 329. 

Notes on Cicada septendedm. 

1885. Riley, C. V. — The periodical or 17-year Cicada. <Harper's Weekly, June 6, 
vol. 29, p. 363, 4 figs. 
Distribution of Brood X and of Brood XXIII; habits, enemies, etc. 

1885. Riley, C. V. — The periodical or 17-year Cicada. <Am. Grange Bulletin, June 11. 
Chronological record, natural history, and popular names. 

1885. Ward, Lester F. — Premature appearance of the periodical Cicada. <Science, 
Vol. V, No. 123, June 12, p. 476. 

1885. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada. An account of Cicada septendedm and 
its trededm race, with a chronology of all broods known. <Bul. No. 8 [old 
series], Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric. (June 17), 46 pp., 8 figs. Second edition, 
July 13, 1885. 

1885. Weed, C. M. — The 17-year locust. <Prairie Farmer, June 20, vol. 57, p. 393. 
Brief account of the habits, etc. 

1885. Riley, C. V. — Notes on the periodical Cicada. <Science, June 26, vol. 5, pp. 

518-521. Reprint: Sci. Amer. Suppl., June 27, 1885, vol. 19, pp. 7905, 7906. 
Distribution of Brood X and of Brood XXIII in 1885; life history, etc. 

1885. Riley, C. V. — Periodical Cicada in Massachusetts. <Science, July 3, vol. 6, p. 4. 
The occurrence in southeastern Massachusetts needs confirmation. 

1885. Riley, C. V. — The influence of climate on Cicada septendedm. <Ent. Am., 

August, Vol. I, p. 91. 

Records the transfers of eggs of Brood X to the extreme Southern States where no sep- 
tendedm brood is known to occur and of Brood XXIII to Northern States where no trededm 
brood is known to occur. 

1885. Davis, Wm^ T. — The periodical Cicada on Staten Island. <Ent. Am., Vol. I, 
August, No. 5, p. 91. 

31117— No. 71—07 11 


1885. Riley, C. V. — The song-notes of the periodical Cicada. <Science, September 25, 

vol. 6, pp. 264, 265. Reprint, with additions: Proc. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. for 

1885, August, 1886, vol. 34, pp. 330-332. Translation: Stett. Ent. Zeit., 1886, 

Jahrg. 47, pp. 158-160. See Science, September 11, 1885, vol. 6, p. 225. 

Kansas City Review, October, 1885, p. 171. 
Description of the three prevalent notes. 

1885. LiNTNER, J. A. — The 13-year Cicada.< Argils (Albany), October 11, p. 4. 
Notice of the life history. 

1885 (?j. Hathaway, G. H. — Sci. American. 

Gives records of Brood XI for 1818-1809. (See Bui. 8, o. s., Dlv. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agri- 
culture, p. 18.) 

1885. LiNTNER, J. A. — The 17-year locust, etc. <Second report on the injurious and 

other insects of the State of New York. Albany (February, 1886), pp. 167-179, 

figs. 43-47. 

Brief bibliography and general account of the species, with special reference to the broods 
occurring in New York. 

1886. Newberry, J. S. — Turrets of periodical Cicada in a cellar. <From School of 

Mines Quarterly, Science, Vol. VII, March 12. 

1886. Howard, L. 0.— Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., I, June 4, 1885 (March 31, 1886), p. 29. 

1886. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada, etc. <Report of the Entomologist, Ann. 
Rept. U. S. Commissioner Agric. for 1885, pp. 233-258, 1 map, 2 pi.. Separate: 
Washington, June 8, 1886, pp. 27-52. 
Reproduction and revision of Bui. 8, with important additions, map and plates. 

1886. Butler, A. W. — The periodical Cicada in southeastern Indiana. <Bul. No. 12, 

Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric. (July 13), pp. 24-31. 
Contains many Interesting observations on habits, enemies, etc. 

1886. Riley, C. V. — Some popular fallacies and some new facts regarding Cicada sep- 

tendecim L. <Proc. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. for 1885 (August), vol. 34, p. 334. 

Variety cassinii is not the race tredecim; twigs with eggs do not necessarily break off or die to 
Insure the hatching of the larva. 

1887. Apgar, E. a. — Some observations on the anatomy of Cicada septendedm. < Jour- 

nal Trenton Nat. Hist. Soc, January, pp. 43-46. 
Mechanism of the genitalia. 

1887. LiNTNER, J. A. — The 17-year locust, Cicada septendedm. <The Owl, May, vol. 

2, pp. 17-19, figs. 1-5. 
Life history. 

1887. LiNTNER, J. A. — An experiment with the 13-year Cicada. <Report of the 
State Entomologist to the Regents of the University of the State of New York 
for the year 1885. 39th Ann. Rept. State Mus. Nat. Hist, for 1885 (July 6), 
pp. Ill, 112. 
Planting of eggs of a 13-year brood In New York. 

1887. RocKWOOD, C. G., Jr. — An insect fight. <Science, vol. 10, No. 237, August 19, 

p. 94. (Sphecius and Cicada.) 

1888. ScHWARZ, E. A. — Cicadas at Fortress Monroe in June, 1886. <Proc. Ent. Soc. 

Wash., Vol. I, July 8, 1886 (March, 1888), p. 52. 

1888. WooDwoRTH, C. W. — Synopsis of North American Cicadidae. <Psyche, Vol. 

V, June, pp. 67, 68. 
Tables for determining genera and species. 

1888. Alexander, A. G. — After-effect of the oviposition of the periodical Cicada. 

< Insect Life, Vol. I, July. p. 15. 

Tells of Injury to apple trees by falling of fruit. 

1888. Riley, C. V., and L. O. Howard. — The periodical Cicada in 1888. <Insect 

Life, Vol. I, July, p. 31. 
Appearance of Brood XIII, septendedm, and Brood XXVI, tredecim, this year. 


1888. McNeal, J. — Insect Life, Vol. I, p. 50. 
Notes of precursors of Brood XIII in 1888. 

1888. Weed, C. M. — Cicadas or harvest flies and beetles. <Pop. Gard., November, 

p. 45, 1 fig. 

1889. March, J. — Wisconsin letter on Cicada septendecim. <Insect Life, Vol. I, Janu- 

ary, p. 218. , 

Brief note on their habits, food, and enemies. 

1889. Riley, C. v., and L. 0. Howard. — The periodical Cicada in 1889. <Insect 

Life, Vol. I, April, p. 298. 
Localities of expected appearance of Brood XIV, septendecim, in this year. 

1889. OsBORN, H. — Notes on destructive insects. <Ann. Rept. Iowa State Agric. 

Soc. for 1888, pp. 670-680. 
Contains a brief general article on the 17-year Cicada. 

1889. MuRTFELDT, M. E.— Rept. U. S. Dept. Agric. 1888, p. 135. 
Trees killed in Illinois. 

1889. LiNTNER, J. A.— An experiment with the 13-year Cicada. <Fifth Rept. on the 

Injur, and other Insects of the State of N. Y., pp. 276-278. 
The planting of eggs for experiment. 

1889. Smith, J. B. — The periodical Cicada. ^'Garden and Forest, p. 436. 
Localities in New Jersey for Broods XIV, II, VI, and X. 

1889. Webster, F. M. — An early occurrence of the periodical Cicada. <Insect 
Life, II, November, pp. 161, 162. 

1889. Smith, John B. — The periodical Cicada. <Ann. Rept. of the Entomologist 

[New Jersey] for 1889, p. 270. 
On Brood XIV and other New Jersey broods. 

1890. Buckhout, Wm. A. — The periodical Cicada in Pennsylvania. < Report 

Penna. Agric. Expt. Sta. for 1889, pp. 182-187, 1 map. 
Distribution of broods in the State. 

1890. Schwarz, E. a. — Notes on Cicada septendecim in 1889. <Proc. Ent. Soc. 
Wash., Vol. I, pp. 230, 231 (May). 
New localities in 18vS9 of Brood XIV; Iccal distribution and reasons for accelerations, etc. 

1890. Packard, A. S. — Insects injurious to forest and shade trees. <Fifth Rept. 

U. S. Ent. Comm., Washington, pp. 95-97. 
A general account. 

1891. Riley, C. V. — Periodical locusts. <Sci. Amer., May 16, p. 313. 

1891. Lewis, R. T. — The song of the Cicada is appreciated and listened to by other 
insects. < Nature News, August, 1891, abstracted in Nature, 44, No. 1140, 
September 3, p. 437. 

1891. Kohl, W. M. — Seventeen-year locust. <Farmer's Review, November 4, p. 

1891. LiNTNER, J. A. — Cicada septendecim Linn. The periodical Cicada. <Seventh 

Rept. on the Injur, and other Insects of the State of N. Y., pp. 296-301. 
Additions to the bibliography and account of a new or unknown brood. 

1892. Webster, F. M. — Cicada septendecim. Notes. <Ohio Bui. No. 45, Dec, p. 210. 

Brief note on 17-year Cicada. 

1893. LiNTNER, J. A. — The periodical Cicada. <Count. Gentl., March 23, p. 226. 

Reply to inquiries that it will not be a locust year in New Jersey or New York. 

1893. Riley, C. V. — Circular Div. Ent. U. S. Dept. Agric, June. 

Localities for Broods XVIII (tredecim) and I (septendecim); request for confirmations, etc. 

1893. Riley, C. V., and L. O. Howard. — The present year's appearance of the peri- 
odical Cicada. <Insect Life, Vol. V, July, pp. 298-300. 
Localities for Brood XVIII, tredecim, and Brood I, septendecim, in this year. 


1893. Slixcjerland, M. V. — The *' 17-year locust" in its hole. <Rural New Yorker, 
July 29, p. 509. 
Life history and habits. 

1893. Riley, C. V. — Periodical Cicada. <Science, August 18, p. 86. 
Localities for Brood XVIII, tredecim, and Brood I, septendecim, in 1893. 

1893. OsBORN. H.— Trans. Iowa State Hort. Soc, 1892. 

Brief accoiint. 

1893. McCarthy, G.— The periodical Cicada. <Bul. No. 92, N. C. Agric. Exp. 
Sta., August, pp. 108, 109, 1 fig. 
Brief account. 

1893. Smith, J. B. — The periodical Cicada. <Bul. No. 95, N. J. Agric. Exp. Sta., 

September, pp. 6, 1 fig. 
The expected appearance of Brood II in the next year in New Jersey. 

1894. Riley, C. V. — Circular Div. Ent. U. S. Dept. Agric, May 5, pp. 4. 

Gives distribution by counties of Broods XIX and II, and asks for confirmations. 

1894. Slingerlaxd, M. V. — The periodical Cicada or locust. <The Farmer's 
Advocate, June 1, p. 225. 
Brief account, and the broods that will appear in 1894. 

1894. Davis, Wm. T. — The 17-year locust on Staten Island. <Proc. Nat. Sci. 
Assn. Staten Isand, IV, No. 4, February 10, pp. 13-15. 

1894. Davis, W. T.— The 17-year Cicada on Staten Island. <Joum. N. Y. Ent. 

Soc, II, No. 1, March, pp. 38, 39. 
Records of cicadas observed since 1877. 

1894. Davis, Wm. T.— The harvest flies (Cicada) of Staten Island, N. Y. <Amer. 

Nat., Vol. 28, No. 328, April, pp. 363, 364. 
Various notes on Cicada tibicen L., song, time of appearance, and capture, and on C 
marginata Say and C. canicularis Harr. Here mention of the periodical Cicada. 

1894. Riley, C. V. — The periodical Cicada. <Rept. of Ent. in Ann. Kept. U. S. 

Dept. Agric, 1893, pp. 204, 205. 
Records of broods for 1803. 

1894. Davis, W. T.— The 17-year locust on Staten Island. <Ainer. Nat., Vol. 28, No. 

329, May, p. 452. 
Cicada observed since 1877. 

1894. Smith, J. B. — The periodical Cicada. <Entom. News, May, Vol. V, p. 145. 

Notice of the brood to appear in 1894, and the relation of the English sparrow to this insect. 

1894. LiNTNER, J. A. — The periodical Cicada, or the 17-year locust. <Circular, 
Albany, N. Y., June 19, p. 4. 
Habits, turrets, questions regarding the present appearance. 

1894. Slingerlaxd, M. V. — The periodical Cicada, or 17-year locust. <Rural New 

Yorker, July 28, p. 470; August 4, p. 488. 
General popular account, habits, and broods. 

1894. Davis, W. T.— The 17-year locust on Staten Island in 1894, <Proc. Nat. Sci. 

Assn. of Staten Island, Vol. IV, No. 9, September, pp. 33-35. 
1894. Shufeldt, R. W. — The 17-year Cicada and some of its allies. <Popular Science 

News, Vol. XXyill, October 10, pp. 154, 155. 

1894. Lander, B. — Hut-building 17-year cicadas. <Sci. Amer., October 13. 

Full account, with explanations and figure. 

1894. Smith, J. B.— Insect Life, Vol. Vll, October, pp. 192-195. 

Under "Notes of the year in New Jersey," gives distribution of Cicada in 1894 in that State. 

1894. Krom, O. S. — The hut-building Cicada. <^Sci. Amer., November 10, p. 295. 
Criticises theories of Mr. Lander, and suggests other explanations. 

1894. Lander, B. — Cicada hut-builders. -^Sci. Amer., November 24, p. 327. 

Replies to Mr. Krom, and gives additional proof In support of his (Lander's) point of view. 


1894. Smith, J. B. — The periodical Cicada. <Rept. Entom., Ann. Rept. N. J. Agric. 

Exper. Sta., pp. 582-591, figs. 52-57. 
General articles relating especially to Brood II In New Jersey; Cicada towers discussed. 

1895. Lander, Benjamin. — Domed burrows of Cicada septendecim . <Journ. N. Y. 

Ent. Soc, III, March 1, pp. 33-38, plate. 
1895. Love, E. G. — Notes on the 17-year Cicada, Cicada septendecim. <JournalN:Y. 
Micros. Soc, XI, April 2, pp. 37-46, plate 49. 
Original observations on structural details, the turrets, etc. 

1895. Marlatt, C. L. — The Hemipterous mouth. <Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., Vol. Ill, 
No. .4, pp. 241-249, June 22, figs. 21-23. 
Detailed study of the hemipterous mouth from dissection of the periodical Cicada. 

1895. LiNTNER, J. A.— The 17-year locust in the State of New York in 1894. <10th 

Rept. Inj. and other Ins. N. Y. From 48th Rept. N. Y. State Mus. Nat. Hist., 

pp. 420-425, 2 figs. 
Quotes circular (see above) and gives the results. 

1895. McCarthy, G. — Bui. No. 120, N. Car. Agric. Exp. Sta., November. 

Contains brief notice of Cicada. 

1896. OsBORN, Herbert. — Observations on the Cicadse of Iowa. <Proc. Iowa Acad. 

Sci., Ill, 1895, pp. 194-203. Cicada septendecim. 
1896. Slingerland, M. V. — The apple crop and 17-year locusts. <Rural New 
Yorker, January 25, p. 53. 
Doubts that the Cicada has any influence on the crop. 

1896. Hyatt, J. D. — Cicada septendecim; its mouth parts, and terminal armor. <Am. 

Mo. Mic. Journ., February 17, p. 46. 
Mouth parts and ovipositor of the Cicada; method of oviposition (illus.) . 

1896. Slingerland, M. V. — On what do 17-vear Cicadas live? <rRural New Yorker, 
May 23, p. 351. 
Food habits of Cicada. 

1896. Bruner, L. — Seventeen-year locusts. <^Nebraska State Journal, June 19. 

1896. Slingerland, M. V. — Seventeen-year locusts not poisonous. <Rural New 

Yorker, July 11, p. 464. 
Food habits of Cicada. 

1897. ScHWARZ, E. A. — The periodical Cicada in 1897. <Cir. No. 22, s. s., Div. Ent., 

U. S. Dept. Agric, May, pp. 4. 
Localities for Brood V, septendecim, and Brood XXII, tredecim, in 1897. 

1897. Webster, F. M.— The 17-year locust in Ohio. <Ohio Farmer, May 20, p. 40, 1 


Expected occurrence in the State. 

1897. Slingerland, M. V. — Do 17-year locusts damage fruit trees? <Rural New 

Yorker, July 3, p. 437. 
Damage not of great importance. 

1897. Webster, F. M. — The San Jose scale and the periodical Cicada. ^Newspaper 

bulletin, Ohio Agric. Exp. Sta., November, pp. 2. 
Relates to Brood V^ in eastern Ohio. 

1897. Webster, F. M. — Brood XV [V] of Cicada septendecim in Ohio. <Can. Ent., 

October, pp. 225-229. 
Distribution of Brood V in Ohio in 1897. 

1897. Webster, F. M. — The periodical Cicada, or so-called 17-year locust in Ohio. 

<Bul. No. 87, Ohio Agric. Exp. Sta., November, pp. 37-68, 11 figs. 
Distribution in Ohio, habits, natural enemies, etc. 

1898. Hopkins, A. D. — The periodical Cicada in West Virginia. <Bul. No. 50, W. Va. 

Agric. Exp. Sta., January (April), pp. 46, 23 figs., 1 map, 4 pis. 
A general account with detailed records of all broods in West Virginia. 


1898. ScHWARZ, E. A. — The periodical Cicada in 1898. <Circular No. 30, s. s. Div. 
Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, April, pp. 4. 
Location of Brood XXIII, tredecim, and Brood VI, sejAendecim, in 1898. 

1898. Howard, L. O. — A new egg-parasite of the periodical Cicada. <Can. Ent., Vol. 

XXX, pp. 102, 103, April. 
Description of Lathromeria cicadx, new species. 
1898. LiNTNER, J. A. — The periodical Cicada. <12th Ann. Rep. State Entom., New 

York, 1896. (May, 1898), pp. 272-289, Pis. IX-XIII. 

Gives additions to bibliography, a general account of insects, with original observations on 
habits, and especially on the Cicada chaml^ers, chiefly based on Brood II in 1894. 

1898. Marlatt, r. L. — The periodical Cicada. An account of Cicada septendecmiy its 
natural enemies and the means of preventing its injury, together with a sum- 
mary of the distribution of the different broods. <Bul. U. S. Dept. Agric, 
Div. Ent. No. 14, n. s., 148 pp., 4 pis., 57 figs. 
Ilabits, varieties, distribution, systematics, structure, development, enemies, and remedies. 

1898. Forbes, S. A. — The seventeen-year Cicada. - Prairie Farmer, June 25, p. 9. 
1898. Sanderson, E. D. — Entomology. <Country Gentleman, July 21, pp. 573, 574, 

Note on Cicada tredecim. 

1898. DE Varigny, H. — La cigale de dix-sept ans. Histoire d'un insecte. <Rev. 

scient. (4) T. 10, pp. 353-3G5. C. septendecim. < 

A lengthy review, with extracts from Bulletin 14, n. s., Division of Entomology. 

1898. ScHENKLiNG, SiEGMUND. — Die siebzehnjahrigo Cikade. <Die Natur, Jahrg. 47, 
pp. 447-451. C. septendecim nach Marlatt. 

1898. Hopkins, A. I). — Some notes on observations in West Virginia. <Bul. No. 17, 
n. s., Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, November, pp. 44-49. 

Includes a reference to work on the periodical Cicada, and especiallj' the relation of tempera- 
ture to appearance. 

1898. Marlatt, C. L. — A new nomenclature for the broods of the periodical Cicada. 
<Miscl. Results Work Div. Entom., Bui. U. S. Dept. Agric, Div. Ent., No. 
18, n. s., pp. 52-58. C. septendecim. 

1898. Marlatt, C. L. — A consideration of the validity of the old records bearing on 

the distribution of the broods of the periodical Cicada, with particular refer- 
ence to the occurrence of Broods VI and XXIII in 1898. <Miscl. Results 
Work Div. Entom., Bui. U. S. Dept. Agric, Div. Ent., No. 18, n. s., pp. 
59-78. C. septendecim. 

1899. Sajo, Karl. — Die siebzehnjiihrigeCikade (C?cac?asc/)<frM/cam). <Prometheus, 

Jahrg. 10, pp. 388-393, 401-406. 13 figs. (Z. T. nach C. L. Marlatt). 

Account of habits and life history based largely on Bui. 14, n. s., U. S. Dept. Agric, Div. 

1899. Webster, F. M.— Distribution of Broods XXII [X], V [XIII], and VIII [XIVJ 
of Cicada septendecim in Indiana. <Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci. 1899, pp. 
225-227, 1 map. 

1899. Smith, J. B. — The periodical Cicada. <Report of the Entom. of the New 

Jersey Agric. Coll. Exp. Station for 1898, pp. 447-450, May 1. 
New Jersey records of Brood VI, 1898, with map. 

1899. Lander, B. — Note on the seventeen-year Cicada. <[Journ. N. Y. Ent. Soc, 
vii, pp. 212-214. 
Notes on the Cicada huts— shallow soil believed to be cause. 

1899. Webster, F. M. — Entomology. <Ohio Farmer, August 31, p. 152. 
Notes on Cicada septendecim. 

1899. Felt, E. P. — Notes of the year for New York. <Country Gentleman, Sept. 
14, p. 733. 
Note on Cicada septendecim. 


1899. Felt, E. P.— Notes of the year for New York. <Bul. No. 20, n. s., Div. Ent., 

U. S. Dept. Agric, November, p. 62. 
Record for Brood VII In western New York, 1809. 

1899; Allen, Grant. — " The day of the cankerworm." <Strand Mag. Oct. 

Relates chiefly to the periodical Cicada, with many illustrations from Bui. 14, n. s. (Div. 
Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric.\ given as new 1 Reprint, Sci. Am. Sup., v. 49 (1900), pp. 20122-20124. 

1900. Felt, E. P. — Fifteenth Report of the State Entomologist on the injurious and 

other insects of the State of New York. <Bul. N. Y. State Museum, vol. 6, 

No. 31, June, p. 544. 
List of localities in western New York for Brood VII, 1899. 

1900. Webster, F. M. — The 17-year locust in Ohio. <Ohio Farmer, July 5. 
Relating to Brood VIII in eastern Ohio. 

1900. Hopkins, A. D. — The periodical Cicada or seventeen-year locust in West Vir- 
ginia. <Bul. No. 68, W. Va. Agric. Exp. Sta., September, pp. 259-330, 
3 pis., 4 figs., 9 maps. A revision of Bui. 50. 

A full account of the Cicada, with descriptions of all the broods occurring in West Virginia, 
with maps. 

1900. Lugger, O. — Bugs injurious to cultivated plants. <Bul. No. 69, Minn. Agric. 
Exp. Sta., December. 

Periodical Cicada discussed, pp. 102-3. Illustrations. Does not occur in Minnesota. 

1900. Webster, F. M. — Notes on the occurrence of Brood XX [VIII] of the period- 

ical Cicada, Cicada septendecim, in Ohio in 1900. <^Entom. News, Vol. XI, 

December, pp. 638-640, 1 fig. 
Report on Brood VIII in Ohio in 1900, with map. 

1901. Slingerland, M. V. — Work of the 17-year locust. <Rural New Yorker, Octo- 

ber 12, p. 690. 

Letter by **S. B." and not by Slingerland. Tied green rye straw around the trees and left 
two trees unprotected. It was several years before they fully recovered (the two trees). 
Says that trees that exude gum are not much harmed by the locust. Speaks of sparrows 
eating Cicada. 

1901. Johnson, W. G. — Timely warning to fruit growers. < American Agricultur- 
ist, July 13, p. 32, 1 fig. 
Notice of coming brood of seventeen-j-ear Cicada. 

1901. Slingerland, M. V. — Seventeen-year locust. Watermelon bug. <Rural 

New Yorker, July 13, p. 484. 
Letter and reply, X. Y. 

1901. Fernald, C. H., & H. T. Fernald. — Report of the entomologists. <Thir- 
teenth Annual Report, Hatch Exp. Sta., Mass., January, p. 86. 
Brief notes on Marthas Vineyard swarm (Brood VIII) in 1900; "as much in evidence as ever. 

1901. Webster, F. M. — Report of the committee on entomology. <Ann. Rept. 
Ohio State Hort. Soc. f. 1900, pp. 1, 2, 7 pis., 2 figs. 
Report on Brood VIII. 

1901. Felt, E. P. — Seventeen-year Cicada. <Country Gentleman, November 7, 

p. 902. 
1901. Hopkins, A. D. — Circular of warning. <W. Va. Agric. Exp. Sta., Oct. 15, 

1 p., 1 map. 

Relating to the 1902 swarm of the periodical Cicada. 

1901. Sanderson, E. D. — Three orchard pests. <Bul. No. 53, Delaware Agric. Exp. 

Sta., January, 1902 (Dec, 1901), pp. 13-19. 

Includes an illustrated account of Cicada septendecim L., pp. 13-19, with special reference to 
Brood X, 1902, in Delaware. 

1902. Felt, E. P. — Spraying for Cicada. <Country Gentleman, March 13, p. 219. 

Mechanical oil emulsions not advised. 

1902. Hunter, W. D.— The periodical Cicada in 1902. <Circ. No. 44, s. s., Div. 

Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, March 13, pp. 4. 
An inquiring circular sent out for Brood X, 1902. 


1902. Sling ERLAND, M. V. — Wliitewash for 17-year locusts. <Rural New Yorker, 

March 15, p. 189. 
Heavy coat r.f whitewash on trees fairly protective. 

1902. Lowe, V. H. — Miscellaneous notes on injurious insects. <Bul. No. 212, New 

York State Agric. Exp. Sta., April, pp. 1-15, pis. I-IV on Cicada. 

Contains an advance warning of Brood X of the periodical Cicada, with some good photo- 

1902. Marlatt, r. L. — A new nomenclature for the broods of the periodical Cicada. 

<Cir. No. 45, s. s., Div. Ent., \I. S. Dept. Agric, pp. 8, May 1. 

1902. Alwood, W. B. — What to do with locusts. <Rural New Yorker, May 17, p 351. 

1902. Hopkins, A. D.— WTiat to do with locusts. < Rural New Yorker, May 17, p. 351. 

1902. HooPES, Abner.— Entom. News, XVIII, Mch., pp. 108, 109. 
Record of hand collecting In niirserj-, June 18, 1902. Bropd X. 

1902. QuAiNTAN'CE, A. L. — The seventeen-year locusts; how the adults feed. <^Rural 

New Yorker, July 26, p. 511. 
1902. OsBORN, H. — Insects .affecting forest trees. <Proc. Columbus Hortic. Soc., 

vol. 17, September, pp. 79-92. 

1902. QuAiNTANCE, A. L. — On the feeding habits of the periodical Cicada. Bui. 

No. 37, n. s., Div. Entom., U. S. Dept. Agric, November, pp. 90-94. 3 figs. 
First careful observation demonstrating feeding of adult cicadas. 

1902. OsBORN, H. — Some notable insect occurrences in Ohio for the first half of 1902. 

<Bul. No. 37, n. s., Div. Entom., V. S. Dept. Agric, November. 
Brief reference (p. 116) to periodical Cicada, Brood X, 1902, in Ohio. 

1902. Sanderson, E. D. — Notes from Delaware. <Bul. No. 37, n. s., Div. Entom., 

U. S. Dept. Agaric, November. 
Brief record for Delaware for Brood X, 1902 (p. 101). 

1902. QuAiNTANCE, A. L. — The periodical Cicada or seventeen-year locust. <Bul. 

No. 87, Maryland Agric. Exp. Sta., November, pp. 65-116; 2 pis., 17 figs. 

Full account of Brood X, 1902, in Maryland, with valuable new observations on habits, 
etc., and map. 

1902. OsBORN, Herbert. — A statistical study of variations in the periodical Cicada. 

<The Ohio Nat., Ill, Dec, pp. 323-326. 

A careful study of the cassinii form. 

1902. OsBORN, Herbert. — Statistical study of variation in the periodical Cicada. 

<(Amer. Assoc) Science, new series, vol. 16, pp. 345, 346. 
Synopsis of paper. 

1902. Sanderson, E. D. — Report of the entomologist: <Delaware Agric. Exp. 

Sta., Report 1902, pp. 137-139 (3 plates). 
Brief notes on periodical Cicada in Delaware, Brood X, 1902. 

1903. Marlatt, C. L. — Notes on the periodical Cicada in the District of Columbia 

in 1902. <Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., vol. 5, pp. 124-126. 
1903. Marlatt, C. L. — An early record of the periodical Cicada. <Proc. Ent. Soc. 
■ Wash., vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 126-7. 

Author's extras published February 4, 1903. 

1903. Pettit, R. H. — Mosquitoes and other insects of the year 1902. <Special Bui. 
No. 17, Mich. Agric. Exp. Station, January. 
Brief note on periodical Cicada (pp. 21, 22) with records for 1902, Brood X. 

1903. Smith, J. B. — Report of the entomological department for 1902. "<New Jersey 
Agric Exp. Sta., February. 

Cicada septendecim, pp. 470-489— record of Brood X, with notes on other New Jersey broods 
and map of all broods occurring in the State. 

1903. Garmax, H. — Seventeen-year locusts in Kentucky. <Bul. No. 107, Kentucky 
Agr. Exp. Sta., pp. 81-100, 4 pis., 3 figs. (May 23). 
General account. Special reference to Brood X, 1902; filaps, 1902 and 1906. 


1903. QuAiNTANCE, A. L. — Entomological notes from Maryland. <^Bul. No. 40, Div. 

Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, August, p. 47, 1 map. 
Includes reference to periodical Cicada, with map for Maryland of Brood X, 1902. 

1903. Alwood, W. B. — A note on the oviposit ion of the sevc^nteen-year locust (Cicada 

septendecim Linn.) <Bul. No. 40, Div. Ent., U. S. Dept. Agric, August, 

pp. 75, 76. 

Indicates the possible repellent action of Bordeaux mixture, and gives list of 33 plants 
oviposited in. 

1903. Meek, W. J. — On the mouth parts of the Hemiptera. <Bul. Univ. Kansas, 

ii, pp. 257-277, pis. vii-xi. November. 
A ietailed anatomical study based on the periodical Cicada. 

1903. Brittox, W. E. — Third Report of the State Entomologist. < Report Conn. 
Agric. Exp. Sta. f. 1903, p. 214. 
Brood XI, 190i, expected but no records obtained. (Was reported for Rhode Island.) 

1903. Felt, E. P. — Eighteenth report of the State Entomologist on injurious and other 

insects of the State of New York. <Bul. 64, N. Y. State Museum, Albany, 

p. 113. 
Brief report of Brood X, 1902, in New York. 

1904. McCooK, Henry. — [The periodical Cicada.] <Harpers' Mag., June, 1904. 

1905. Garmax, H. — The seventeen-year locust will not appear in Kentucky this year 

(1905). <Kentucky Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 120, pp. 74-76. May. 
Distribution of Broods XIV, 1906, and XIX, 1907, from Kentucky Bulletin 107. 

1905. [Surface, H. A.] — The seventeen-year locust in Pennsylvania. <Penna. Dept. 

Agric. Mo. Bui. Div. Zool., vol. 3, No. 6 (Oct.), pp. 174, 175. 
Advance warning of Brood XIV, 190C. 

1906. Marlatt, C. L.— The periodical Cicada in 1906. <r. S. Dept. Agric, Bur. 

Ent. Cir. 74, pp. 5, figs. 3, Apr. 16. 
1906. [Surface, H. A.] — The Cicada or seventeen-year locust in Pennsylvania. 
<Penna. Dept. Agric. Mo. Bui. Div. Zool., vol. 3, No. 12, pp. 369-377. 
Various records of appearance in Pennsylvania. 

1906. [Sandel, Rev. Andreas.] — "Extracts from the Journal of." <Pa. Mag. of 
Hist. & Biog., Vol. XXX, Oct., pp. 448-449. 




[From a copy, by Dr. J. O. Morris, of Doctor Smith's unpublished manuscript.] 

It is proper to remark in relation to the districts in this tribe or 
division that there is some uncertainty in relation to some of them 
(as well as to those of the northern division) that have their borders 
on the great line that separates the two divisions, owing to the fact, 
remarked upon in another place in this work, that the districts often 
interlock, those of the northern running down into the territory of 
the southern and those of the southern running up into that of the 
northern division, sometimes for hundreds of miles. A remarkable 
instance of this will be found in the case of the southern Illinois dis- 
trict, which ascends to the north nearly three degrees of latitude above 
the regular line of division; and also to the lapping of one district 
over another on their respective boundaries, elsewhere noticed. The 
reader will therefore make due allowance for such errors as he may 
find in the dates of appearance. 


1842. Illinois. — In Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Perry, Randolph, Monroe, St. 
Clair, Madison, Bond, Clinton, Edwards, Marion, and adjacent counties in 
the southern end of the State, in 1829, 1842, 1855, and again in 1868. Of this 
there is great doubt whether it belongs to the seventeen-year tribe, as is 
indicated by the following paragraph from the Baltimore Sun of June 13, 1859: 
"The locusts have made their appearance in Egypt, in southern Illinois, 
and cover woods and orchards in swarms." 

1842. Kentucky. — Northwest corner of State, about Paducah and adjacent counties 
in the south, in 1829, 1842, 1855, and again in 1868. 

1842. Alabama. — Russell and adjacent counties on the east side of Black Warrior 
River, in 1842, 1855, and again in 1868. 

1842. Louisiana. — Morehouse Parish, Caddo, Claiborne, Washita, and adjacent 
parishes, in 1855, and again in 1868. 

1842. Arkansas.— \\\ the northern counties in 1842, 1855, 1868. 

1842. South Carolina. — Chester district and all adjoining to the Georgia line and to 
North Carolina north[ward] in 1816, 1829, 1842, 1855, 1868. 

1842. Tennessee. — Montgomery, Bedford, Williamson, Rutherford [and adjacent 
counties], in 1842, 1855, and again in 1868. 

1842. Georgia.— Cherokee County in 1816, 1829, 1842, 1855, 1868. 

1842. North Caro^ma.— Mecklenburg County in 1816, 1829, 1842, 1855, 1868. 


DR. GIDEON B. smith's CHRONOLOGY. 171 

1842. Missouri.— All southeast part in 1829, 1842, 1855, 1868. 

1843. Ggorgfia.— Habersham and Rabun(?) counties in 1843, 1856, 1869. 

1843. Georgia. — ^Muscogee, Jasper, Greene, Washington, and adjacent counties in 1843, 

1856, 1869. 

1844. Florida. — Jackson, Gadsden, and Washington counties in 1844, 1855, 1870. 

1845. Mississippi. — From the Mississippi River east to a ridge that divides the State 

north and south, 45 miles from the river, and north and south to the bound- 
aries of the State, in 1806, 1819, 1832, 1845, 1858. 

1845. Louisiana.— 'EBEt and West Feliciana in 1806, 1819, 1832, 1845, 1858. 

1846. Georgia. — Gwinnett, Dekalb, and Newton counties in 1846, 1859. 
1846. Tennessee. — Northern part in 1846, and again in 1859. 

1846. Mississippi. — All the east of the State, from the ridge 45 miles from the river 
on the west to the east boundary, in 1820, 1833, 1846, 1859. 

1849. Texas. — Appeared in some parts in vast numbers; unable to get any particulars. 
If true, will appear again in 1862. 

1854. Georgia.— Cherokee County, northern part, in 1828, 1841, 1854, 1867. 

1855. North Carolina. — Buncombe and McDowell counties in 1855. 

[N. B. — Doubtful whether this is a southern or northern district. They 
appeared in 1855, at all events, and will again in 1868 or 1872.] 
1859. Louisiana. — Carroll Parish, May 1. 
1859. Arkansas. — Phillips County, May 10. 
1859. Tennessee. — About Memphis. 


1842. The locust appeared in North Carolina from Raleigh to near Petersburg, in 
Virginia, and will appear again in 1859. 

1842. They appeared in the valley of Virginia from the Blue Ridge on the east, the 
Potomac River on the north, to the Tennessee and North Carolina lines on 
the south, and several counties in the west, in 1808, 1825, 1842, and will 
appear again in 1859. 

1842. Illinois. — About Alton, and again in 1859. 

1842. Maryland. — Southern part of St. Mary County, dividing the county about mid- 
way east and west. Appeared there in 1825, 1842, and again in 1859. 

1842. North Carolina. — Rowan, Davie, Cabarrus, Iredell, and adjacent counties in 
1825, 1842, and will appear again in 1859. 

1842. Indiana. — Sullivan and Knox counties in 1859. 

1843. New York and Connecticut from Long Island Sound, west side of Connecticut 

River, north on both sides of the Hudson River to Washington County, N. Y., 
and west to Montgomery County on the Mohawk Riv^r. Appeared there in 
1809, 1826, 1843, and will again in 1860. 

1843. Michigan. — Kalamazoo; appeared in 1843, and will again in 1860. 

1843. Indiana. — Dearborn County; will again in 1860. 

1843. North Carolina. — Caldwell(??), Rockingham, Stokes, Guilford, Rowan, Surry, 
and adjacent counties; appeared in 1792, 1809, 1826, 1843, and will again in 

1843. Pennsylvania. — Bounded by Peters Mountain on the south, Mahonlago (?) 
Mountain on the north, and extending from the Susquehanna to the Dela- 
ware River; appeared there in 1843, and will in 1860. 

1843. New Jersey .—Whole State, in 1775, 1792, 1809, 1826, 1843, and again in 1860. 

1843. Maryland. — From Anne Arundel County to the north part of St. Mary, from 

the Potomac to the Chesapeake Bay, in 1809, 1826, 1843, 1860. 

1844. Illinois. — In Warren County, and will again in 1861. 
1844. Iowa. — In various parts, and will again in 1861. 


1845. Missovri. — All th(? wcHtorn part of the State from Saline County west, as far as 

heard from, north to the boundary of the State and south to Arkansas in 1845, 
and will again in 1862. 

1846. Ohio. — Eastern part, extending west to Scioto River and Sandusky on' Lake 

Erie, extending over twelve counties in 1829, 1846, and again in 1863. 
1846. Virginia. — Southeastern part in 1829, 1846, and will in 1863. 

1846. I'lr^tma.— Lewis County, in 1795, 1812, 1829, 1846, and will in 1863. 

1847. About Wheeling, in Virginia, in 1830, and will again in 1847, 1864. 

1848. New York. — In Monroe, Livingston, Madison, and adjacent counties in 1797, 

1814, 1831, 1848, and will in 1865. 

1849. Pennsylvania. — In Armstrong, Clarion, Jefferson, Chemung, Huntingdon, Cam- 

bria, Indiana, Butler, Mercer, Beaver, and in nearly all the western counties 
in 1832, 1849, and will in 1866. 

1849. Ohio. — In Mahoning, Carroll, Trumbull, Columbiana, and adjacent counties, 

especially in Columbiana in 1812, 1829, 1846, the eastern district lapping over 
this in that county; appeared in this district in 1815, 1832, 1849, and will 
in 1866. 

1850. Virginia. — County (?) and adjacent territory in 1833, 1850, and will in 1867. a 

1851. Maryland, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia. — Beginning at Germantown, Pa.; 

south to the middle of Delaware; west through the eastern shore of Mary- 
land, upper part of Anne Arundel; west through the District of Columbia, 
Loudoun County, Va., where it laps over the south Virginia district from the 
Potomac to Loudoun County some 10 to 20 miles in width, and [in] this strip 
of territory they appear every eighth and ninth year. Thence the line 
extends through the northern counties of Virginia and Maryland to the 
Savage Mountain, and thence along the southern tier of counties in Pennsyl- 
vania to Germantown. The whole territory embraced in these boundaries is 
occupied by the locusts. Appeared here in 1766, 1783, 1800, 1817, 1834, 1851, 
and will again in 1868. 

1851. Ohio. — Cincinnati; Franklin, Columbus; Piqua, Miami County. This district 

extends into Indiana to New Albany, Madison, Indianapolis, to the Wabash 
River, Terre Haute, and to Louisville, Ky., in 1834, 1851; will again in 1868. 

1852. Massachusetts. — Bristol County, Dearfield, Hampshire, and to Fall River in 

1767, 1784, 1801, 1818, 1835, 1852, and will in 1869. 

1853. Oto.— Vinton County in 1853, and will in 1870. 

1853. Illinois. — In Jo Daviess County, and will in 1870. 

1854. Illinois. — In Winnebago, Menard County, and neighborhood in 1854; again in 


1855. Maryland. — On the old Liberty Road leading to Carroll, and Adams County, 

Pa., and on the Winden (?) Mile Road extending to Carlisle, Pa., in 1838, 

1855, and in 1872. 
1855. Kentucky. — About Frankfort, Lexington, and Flemingsburg, extending to 

Meigs and Gallia counties, Ohio, in 1838, 1855, and in 1872. 
1855. Maryland. — Eastern Shord from Cecil County to Worcester in 1838, 1855, and 

in 1872. 
1855. Massachusetts.— B'Arnstaihle County, in 1770, 1787, 1804, 1821, 1838, 1855, and in 

1855. Virginia. — Kanawha County, extending only 15 miles each way, in 1838, 1855, 

and in 1872. 
1855. North Carolina. — In Buncombe and McDowell counties in 1855; again in 1872. 

[N. B. — There is some doubt whether this district is not a 13-year district. 
The locusts appeared there in 1855, at all events.] 

o This evidently refers to Brood IX, which is known from many counties in Vir- 
ginia (see pp. 49-50). 


[Note on the Smith Register. — An examination of the above register of appear- 
ances, prepared by Dr. Gideon B. Smith, at once indicates the painstaking care which 
Doctor Smith must have devoted to the subject, and surprises one with the accuracy 
and completeness of the records. All of the important broods known until recently 
are designated more or less completely in Doctor Smith's register, namely, the seven 
13-year broods and the fourteen 17-year broods mentioned in Bulletin 14. 

Taking the records in the order in which they are given in Doctor Smith's register, 
and beginning with the 13-year race, it will be seen that the localities listed after 1842 
and 1855 refer to Brood XIX, after 1843 to Brood XX, and similarly 1844 to Brood XXI, 
1845 to Brood XXII, 1846 and 1859 to Brood XXIII, 1849 to Brood XXVI, and 1854 
to Brood XVIII. 

Comparing in the same way his register of the northern tribe, or 17-year race, it is 
seen that his localities listed after 1842 apply to Brood I, after 1843 to Brood II, and 
similarly 1844 to Brood III, 1845 to Brood IV, 1846 to Brood V, 1847 to Brood VI, 1848 
to Brood VII, 1849 to Brood VIII, 1850 to Brood IX, 1851 to Brood X, 1852 to Brood 
XI, 1854 to Brood XIII, and 1855 to Brood XIV. The records given after 1853 are 
probably erroneous, as indicated in the discussion of my Brood XII (pp. 55-56). — 



Acetic acid, against periodical Cicada 143 

Ampelis cedrorum^ enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Ants, enemies of periodical Cicada 130 

Aphis, woolly. (See Schizoneura lanigera.) 

Apple, food plant of periodical Cicada 102 

injury through oviposition of periodical Cicada 105, 106, 107 

Astragalinus tristisy enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Bd^olophus bicolory enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Bass, black. (See Micropterus salmoides.) 

Bdella sp., enemy -of periodical Cicada 138 

Birch, black, food plant of periodical Cicada 101 

Bisulphid of carbon, against grape root-aphis 145 

periodical Cicada 145-146 

Blackbird. (See Quiscalus quiscula and Q. q. seneus.) 

Bordeaux mixture, repellent against periodical Cicada 144 

Canker-worm, Nothrus ovivorus an enemy 135 

Carbolic acid, against periodical Cicada 143 

Cardinal grosbeak. (See Cardinalis cardinalis.) 

Cardinalis cardinalis, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Catbird. (See Galeoscoptes carolinensis.) 
Cat briar. (See Smilax rotundifolia.) 
Catfish, blue. (See Ichthxlurus punctatus.) 

Catostomus teres, enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Cecidomyiid, enemy of periodical Cicada 129 

Cedar bird. (See Ampelis cedrorum.) 

Chalcidids, parasites of periodical Cicada 131 

Cheyletus sp. , enemy of peripdical Cicada 138 

Chickadee, Carolina. (See Penthestes carolinensis.) 
Chipmunk. (See Tamias striatus.) 

Cicada ca^sinii, a variety of periodical Cicada 20-22 

= Tihicen septendedm, var. cassinii 22 

dog-day. (See Cicada tihicen.) 

marginata, probably periodic 12 

periodical, "adobe dwellings." {See cones.) 

adult, duration of stage 90-91 

habits 99-102 

advantages to species from long larval life 13 

appearance regarded as ominous presage 147 

appearances in future 34 

as food for animals 103-104 

man 102-104, 148 

beak 79-81 



Cicada, periodical, bibliography 154-169 

bird enemies 138-139 

breeding record confirming 17-year period 114-116 

Bnxxl I— septendecim— 1910 38-39 

II — septendedm — 1911 39-41 

III— septendecim— 1912 41-42 

l\— septendedm— 191S \ 42-43 

V — septendecim — 1914 43-44 

VI — septendecim — 1915 44-46 

Yll— septendecim— 191Ci 46-47 

\lll— septendedm— 1917 47-19 

IX— septendedm— 191S 49-50 

X— septendedm— 1919 50-54 

XI— septendedm— 1920 54-55 

Xll— septendedm— 1921 55-57 

Xlll— septendedm— 1922 57-58 

XIY— septendedm— 1923 58-60 

X\— septendedm— 1907 60-62 

XVI— septendedm— 190S 62-63 

X\ll— septendedm— 1909 63-64 

X\lll—tr€dedm—1919 65-66 

XIX— tredecim— 1907 66-67 

XX—trededm—190S 68 

XXI— trededm— 1909 68-69 

XXll—trededm— 1910 69-70 

XXlll— trededm— 1911 71-73 

XXIY— trededm— 1912 73-74 

XXV— trededm— 191S 74 

XXVI— ^re(/mm— 1914 74-75 

XXVII— ^r€rfmm— 1915 75 

XXVIII— <r6(fecim— 1916 75 

XXIX— trededm— 1917 75-76 

XXX— trededm— 191S 76-77 

brood 8 22-34 

classification 25-28 

future appearances 34 

of 14, 15, or 16 year periods 33 

17-year race, range 38-64 

13-year race, range 65-74 

origin 22-25 

range 38-77 

relationship 28-30 

sources of error in old records 30-33 

burrowing 125-126 

*' chimneys." (See cones.) 

chronology of Dr. Gideon B. Smith 170-173 

climate in relation to races 18-20 

cones 91-98 

confusion with locust or grasshopper , . . . 11 

damage by adults 11, 106-108 

larv^se and pupae 126 

decimation, causes 13-14 

description of stages 118-121 

INDEX. 177 


Cicada, periodical, dipterous enemies 129 

distribution 34-77 

local 99-101 

sources of information 34-35 

duration of adult stage ^ 90-91 

dwarf form 20-22 

early records 146-150 

egg parasites 130-132 

eggs, description Ill 

growth and hatching 110-112 

insertion 109-110 

retarded development Ill 

emergence, acceleration artificially 90 

method 91 

period V. . . 88-90 

food habits of adult 101-102 

larva and pupa 12^123 

fungous disease - 139-140 

habits and characteristics, summary 11-14 

of adult 99-102 

larva and pupa 122-127 

hemipterous enemies 130 

history 146-154 

* * huts. ' * {See cones. ) 

hymenopterous enemies 130 

in literature 146-154 

insect parasites 129-138 

larva, food habits 122-123 

habits 122-127 

newly hatched, actions and description. 112 

stages, descriptions 118-120 

location of stages in soil 124-125 

mite parasites of eggs 135-138 

mouth parts 79-81 

musical apparatus 82-84 

natural enemies 127-140 

numbers ..:. : . . 99-100 

oviposition, method 109-110 

result to plant 106-108 

ovipositor : 81-^82 

plants oviposited in 105 

precautionary measures against injury 144-145 

pupa, description. .- . . 121 

food habits ., 122-123 

habits 122-127 

races 14-20 

range of broods 38-77 

of seventeen-year race — .... 38-64 

thirteen-year race : 65-77 

species and the two races: 35-37 

remedies and preventives 140-146 

repellents 143-144 

"roofs." (/^e€ cones.) 

31117— No. 71—07 12 



Cicada, periodical, seventeen-year breeding record 114-116 

broods, relationship 29-30 

range 3^-64 

race 14, 16-18 

song notes 84-86 

stages, description 118-121 

history 116-118 

location in soil 124-125 

sting, so-called 86-88 

structural details 78-84 

differences between the two races 17-18 

superstitions 147 

systematic position 77-78 

thirteen-year broods, relationship 30 

range 66-77 

race. (See also Cicada trededm) 14-18 

* * towers. ' ' (See cones. ) 

transformation to adult 98-99 

* 'turrets. ' ' (See cones. ) 

underground life 112-121 

experimental proofs 112-116 

use in making soap 104 

variety 20-22 

pru%naM= Cicada tibicen 78 

septendecim. (See also Cicada, periodical, and Tibicen septendedm.) 

considered by Walsh a species distinct from C. trededm 17 

= Tibicen septendedm 22 

tibicen^ Sphedus spedosus an enemy 132 

trededm. (See also Cicada, periodical, thirteen-year broods and race.) 

considered by Walsh a species distinct from C. septendedm. . 17 

= Tibktfl septeniedmy race trededm 22 

first publication of name 15-16, 153 

Cicadas, yearly recurrence not necessarily indicative of life round limited to a 

year 12 

Climate, in relation, to races of periodical Cicada 18-20 

Coccyzus amerUamLS^ enemy of periodical Cicada 138-139 

erythrophthalmuSy enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Colaptes auratus luteuSy enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Corvus brackyrhynchoSj enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Cowbird. (See Molothrus ater.) 

Crayfish, house-building habit 91 

Crow. (See Corvus brachyrkynchos.) 
Cuckoo, black-billed. (See Coccyzus erythrophthahrms.) 
yellow-billed. (See Coccyztis am^ericanus.) 

Dendroica cerulean not found to eat periodical Cicada 139 

Development, retardation in eggs of periodical Cicada Ill 

Digger wasp, larger. (See Wasp, larger digger.) 

Disease, periodical Cicada imagined cause 147 

Distribution, of periodical Cicada 34-77, 99-101 

Dogs, enemies of periodical Cicada 104 

Dragon-flies, enemies of periodical Cicada 128 

Dryiohates pubescens medianus, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Evergreens, seldom oviposited in by periodical Cicada .' 105 

INDEX. 179 

Flicker. (See Colaptes auratus luteus.) 
Flycatcher, crested. (See Myiarchus crinitv^,) 

Fruit trees, injury to roots by periodical Cicada 126 

Fungous disease of periodical Cicada 139-140 

Galeoscoptes carolinensis, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Gnatcatcher, blue-gray. {Bee Polioptila cserulea.) 
Goldfinch, American. (See Astragalinus tristis.) 

Grape root-aphis, bisulphid of carbon a remedy 146 

Grapevines, injury through oviposition of periodical Cicada. 107 

Grosbeak, cardinal. (See Cardinalis cardiruUis.) 

Ground-beetles, enemies of periodical Cicada 128 

Hand collection, remedy for periodical Cicada. . : 141-142 

Harvest fiy. {See Cicada.) 

Helraitherus vermivaruSj enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Hickories, oviposition of periodical Cicada 105, 106 

Hogs, enemies of periodical Cicada 91, 103, 104. 128 

Hoplophora sp., enemy of periodical Cicada 136 

Horizopus virens, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Hylocichla mustelina^ enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Ichthadurus punctatus, eliemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Icterus galbuUij enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

spuriuSy enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Indigo bird. (See Pdsserina cyanea.) 

IpMs oralis, enemy of periodical Cicada 137 

Kerosene emulsion, against periodical Cicada 142, 143 

Lanimreo flavifrons, enemy of periodical Cicada '. 138 

Ijaihromerls cicadx, parasite of periodical Cicada , 131-132 

Lime-sulphur wash, possible value as repellent against periodical Cicada 144 

washes, repellents against periodical Cicada 143-144 

* *Locust, seventeen-year," erroneous name for periodical or 17-year Cicada 11 

Locusts, as articles of diet 102-103, 148 

Maple, hard, injury through oviposition of periodical Cicada 107-108 

Martin, purple. (See Progne suhis.) 

Massospora dcadina, fungous disease of periodical Cicada 139-140 

Melanerpes erythrocephalus, enemy of periodical Cicada. 138 

Merula migratoria, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Mesodon elevata, feeding on dead periodical Cicada 139 

exoleta, feeding on dead periodical Cicada 139 

Micropterus mlmoides, enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Molothnis ater^ enemy of periodical Cicada , , . 138 

Myiarchus crinitus, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Mymarid, parasite of periodical Cicada 130 

Nothrus ovivonis, enemy of canker-worm 136 

Nuthatch, white-bellied. (See Sitta carolinensis.) 

Oak, oviposition of periodical Cicada 100, 105', 106 

Oppia pilosa, enemy of periodical Cicada 136 

Oribata aspidioti, enemy of scale insects.'. 135 

sp., enemy of periodical Cicada 136 

Orihatella sp., enemy of periodical Cicada 136 

Oribatid mites, enemies of periodical Cicada 136 

Onhatula sp., enemy of periodical Cicada 136 

Oripoda eloTtgata, enemy of periodical Cicada 136 


Oriole, Baltimore. (See Icterus galbula.) 

orchard. (See Icterus 8 puriut.) 
Passer domesticus. {See Sparrow, English.) 

Passerina cyanea, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Peach, injury through ovi position of periodical C*icada 107 

Pear, food plant of periodical Cicada 102 

injury through oviposition of periodical Cicada 107 

to roots by periodical Cicada 126 

Pedicidoides ventricosus, enemy of periodical Cicada 137 

Penthestes carolinensis, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Periodical Cicada. {See Cicada, periodical.) 
Pewee, wood. (See Horizoptts virens.) 

Pipilo erythrophtftalmv*, enemy of periodical Cicada 1 38 

Piranga erythromtlas, enemy of periodical Cicada 338 

Polioptila cssrulea, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Poultry, enemies of periodical Cicada 104, 128, 148 

Progne stibis, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Pyrethrum, against periodical Cicada 142-143 

QuiscahjLS quiscula aeneus, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

enemy of periodical Cicada 115 

Retarded development, in eggs of periodical Cicada Ill 

Robin. (See Meriila migratoria.) 

Scale insects, Oribata aspidioti an enemy 135 

Sckizoneura lanigera, injury to fruit trees following oviposition of periodical 

Cicada 108 

Sciurus rufiventer, enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Seventeen-year Cicada. {Se.e Cicada, periodical.) 

locustV erroneous name for periodical or 17-year Cicada 11 

Sitia carolinensiSf enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Smilax rotundifolia, oviposition of periodical Cicada attempted 105 

Snails. (See Mesodon exoleta and M. elevata.) 

Soldier-bugs, enemies of periodical Cicada 128 

Sparrow, chipping. (See Spizella socialis.) 

English, enemy of periodical Cicada 13, 104, 128, 138 

Sphecivs speciosus. {See also Wasp, larger digger.) 

enemy of Cicada tibicen 132 

Stizus grandis a synonym 139 

Spizella socialis, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Squirrel, fox. (See Sciurus rufiventer.) 

ground. {See Tamias striatus.) 

Squirrels, enemies of periodical Cicada 103, 104 

Stizus grandis==Sph€cius speciosus 139 

Sucker, white. (See Catostomus teres,) 

Superstitions, regarding periodical Cicada 147 

Sweet gum, food plant of periodical Cicada 101 

Tachina sp., parasite of periodical Cicada 128 

TaTnias siriatus, enemy of periodical Cicada 139 

Tanager, sqarlet. (See Piranga erythromelas.) 

Tettigonia septendecim, name of Fabricius for periodical Cicada 149 

Thrasher, brown. (See Toxostoma rufum.) 

Thrips, enemies of periodical Cicada 130 

Thrush, wood. (See Hylocichla mustelina.) 

INDEX. 181 

Tibicen cruentifera and allies, mistaken for periodical Cicada 36, 45-4() 

rimosay mistaken for T. septeiykcifn 6'J 

geptendecim. (See also Cicada septendedm and Cicada, periodical.) 

correct name for periodical Cicada 22 

race tredecim^ correct name for 13-year race of periodical 

Cicada 22 

var. cammiy correct name for Cicada cassimi 22 

Titmouse, tufted. (See Bxolophus hicolor.) 

Tobacco dust, against periodical Cicada : . . . 145 

Towhee. (See Pipilo erythrophthalirius.) 

Toxostama rufum, enemy of periodical Cicada 138 

Trichogrammid parasite of periodical Cicada 130-131 

Tyroglyphus cocciphilusy enemy of periodical Cicada 137 

Vir€09ylva gilva^ not found to eat periodical Cicada 139 

Vireo, warbling, {^ee Vireosylva gilva.) 

yellow-throated. (See Lanivireo fiavifrons.) 
Warbler, cerulean. (See Dendroica cerulea.) 

worm-eating. (See Helmitherus vermivorus.) 

Wasp, larger Jigger, enemy of periodical Cicada 132-136, 13S' 

Woodpecker, downy. (See Dryobates pubescens medianus.) 
red-headed. (See Melanerpes srythrocephalus.) 









I i 



3 2044 102 823 416